Of course someone who commits cold blood is insane. That’s why they can go beyond morality to take another’s life. The insanity plea has always been nother more thn legal trickery to make a farce of justice.
And here’s the author’s take:
I’ve never been able to go the full 100% in either direction on this question. My basic take has always been that anyone willing to go on a spree of murder, rape or other violent crimes has to be pretty much crazy by definition, right? Does anyone honestly think that Charles Manson is sane? But just because you’re crazy, that doesn’t mean that you’re not accountable for your actions. And to at least some extent, it seems like even the most violent criminals are aware of what they’re doing and even realize on some level that it’s wrong. From that perspective, insanity (and most especially “temporary insanity”) shouldn’t be a defense.
The slimebag in question killed his estranged wife, two of his three kids, and his mother-in-law.
I think he should fry, crazy or not.
More @ Will SCOTUS help do away with the insanity defense?
You decide for yourselves.
