A man is charged with battery for injuring a person by forcefully squeezing their arm. At trial, the defense presents uncontroverted evidence that, due to a severe mental disease, the man honestly believed he was squeezing a lemon to make lemonade. The jurisdiction applies the M'Naghten rule for the insanity defense.
Under the M'Naghten rule, which of the following is the most likely outcome?
The man will be convicted of battery because his act of squeezing was voluntary.
The man will be acquitted only if he can also prove that he did not know squeezing a person's arm was wrong.
The man will be acquitted by reason of insanity because he did not understand the nature and quality of his act.
The man will be convicted of a lesser offense because his mental disease only serves to mitigate, not excuse, his conduct.
Under the M'Naghten rule, a defendant may be acquitted if, due to a 'disease of the mind,' they either (1) did not know the 'nature and quality' of the act they were doing, or (2) if they did know it, they did not know that what they were doing was wrong. In this scenario, the man's belief that he was squeezing a lemon means he did not understand the nature and quality of his act, which was actually injuring a person. Therefore, he has a valid insanity defense under the first prong of the M'Naghten rule.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the M'Naghten Rule?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does 'mens rea' mean?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the legal system address mental illness in criminal cases?