19. If the jury believes the testimony of the defense experts, under what circumstances could the jury properly acquit the woman of murder?

The M'Naghten Test focuses on whether a defendant knew the nature of the crime or understood right from wrong at the time the defendant committed the crime. In order to be declared legally insane under M'Naghten, a defendant must meet one of these two distinct criteria. Basically, the test hinges on a defendant's inability to distinguish right from wrong. A defendant will be found not guilty for reason of insanity, under M'Naghten, when at the time of the act, she: (i) was so deranged that she did not know the «nature or quality» of her actions (The phrase «nature or quality» refers to the physical nature and quality of the act, rather than the moral quality. It covers the situation where the defendant does not know what she is physically doing.); OR (ii) the defendant knew the nature and quality of her actions, but she was so deranged that she did not know what she was doing was wrong. The second criterion of the M'Naghten Test asks whether the defendant knew her act was morally wrong.

In comparison, under the Model Penal Code (MPC), a criminal defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity if she is diagnosed with a relevant mental disorder, and at the time of the incident, was unable to either: appreciate the criminality of her conduct; or conform her conduct to the requirements of the law. Essentially, under the MPC, a legally insane individual must have been diagnosed with a mental illness or defect (usually by a court-appointed mental health professional) and either: (i) did not know right from wrong; OR (ii) lacked the ability to control the impulse that led to the commission of the crime.

B is correct. The woman committed murder and the facts state that the woman knew that killing the victim was wrong, but she suffered from a serious mental illness that made killing the victim irresistible. Although the woman knew what she was doing was wrong, she lacked the ability to control the impulse to kill. As such, a jury could find the woman to be legally insane under the MPC Test, because she could not conform her conduct to the requirements of the law.

A is incorrect. The facts state that the woman did know killing was wrong but simply could not resist the impulse to kill. Under M'Naghten, the woman would not be found legally insane and would not be acquitted because she knew the nature and quality of her actions (she knew what she was physically doing), and she knew it was morally wrong. As such, the jury would likely find the woman guilty under M'Naghten.

C is incorrect. As discussed above, the jury would likely find the woman guilty under M'Naghten because she knew the nature and quality of her actions (she knew what she was physically doing), and she knew that killing the victim was morally wrong. The woman would be acquitted under the MPC Test, however, because she had a mental illness and, though the woman knew what she was doing was wrong, she could not conform her conduct to the requirements of the law. As such, the woman could be acquitted under the MPC but not under M'Naghten.

D is incorrect. In this case, the evidence shows that the woman stalked the victim for several hours before following him to an isolated hiking trail where she shot and killed him. The facts suggest that the woman committed all the elements of murder. Therefore, the woman will only be excused from responsibility if she meets a recognized defense of insanity. As previously discussed, the woman will only be acquitted under the MPC Test.