Law Commons^™

Book Review: Psychiatric Justice, Alice M. Batchelder

Akron Law Review

In an era in which extensive judicial emphasis has been placed on "due process of law" in criminal proceedings, both in the federal courts and in the state courts, Dr. Szasz's book serves as a jarring reminder that in at least one vital area of the concept of due process, much remains to be done. The emerging definition of due process has enunciated the rights guaranteed the individual by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments; and viewed within that framework, this book, although published in 1965, remains particularly timely, for Szasz, speaking as a psychiatrist, endeavors to demonstrate how …

Book Review: The Role Of Psychiatry In Law, Leslie J. Martin

Akron Law Review

If you ask the man on the street about his views on the criminal law, typically his response will include a commentary on some notorious crime. What impresses him most about that crime? Commonly his answer will be that he was amazed that the "murderer" was able to escape conviction by invoking the defense of insanity. This view is remarkably prevalent. It is the same view which led Queen Victoria to ask Parliament to formulate the rigid M'Naghten Rule in 1843. This test of insanity survives to the present day, perplexing many members of the legal profession and alienating most …

Criminal Responsibility: Knowledge, Will And Choice, Robert J. Willey

Akron Law Review

The Court acknowledged that the M'Naghten formula was the recognized test for insanity, that it was a test of criminal responsibility rather than a medical test of insanity, that it has been followed in a classic fashion, that each doctor had compressed his final conclusion into the required M'Naghten strait jacket, and that the defense had proved by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity.

Both of these courts claimed to be following M'Naghten, though the Colby court decried its present use, and the Keaton court approved an instruction that included …

The Soldier And The Imbecile: How Holmes's Manliness Fated Carrie Buck, John Kang

Akron Law Review

The Supreme Court case of Buck v. Bell, while never overturned, endures in infamy among those who know it. For in that case the Court had tacitly sanctioned what Adolph Hitler made unequivocally evil a few years after the Court’s adjudication: eugenics. However, the case was only partly about that. Indeed, I will argue in this essay that the Court’s opinion, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, turned perhaps more significantly on the trope of manliness as an organizing theme. In a sense Holmes was filtering the facts of Buck through his own ordeals and triumphs with manliness, particularly as …