Open AccessThe Case of Styllou Christofi: Criminal Insanity As a Defense In Court [University of Central Oklahoma]
Author(s) -
Rebecca taylor Dahl
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of student research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2167-1907
DOI - 10.47611/jsr.vi.610
Subject(s) - insanity , insanity defense , jury , law , plea , legislation , legislature , criminology , political science , diminished responsibility , psychology , criminal law , punishment (psychology) , social psychology
Criminal insanity as a defense continues to be an expulatory plea. The law enforcement and the courts in London have dealt with information reported regarding violent people during 1954. It focuses on the case of Christofi Styllou and her crime committed in 1952, her incarceration from 1952 through her trial, and execution in 1954. The research for this project focuses on court rulings relating to the determination of behaviors, either identified as understanding the difference between having a psychological disorder or defined as criminally insane. In the U.S., the Durham Rule applies, which means that a jury could determine whether the defendant had a mental diagnosis, or whether he or she could be charged guilty by insanity. This precedent does not apply to the UK. Nonetheless, in the U.K., multiple acts of legislation relating to criminal insanity passed between 1800 and 1954. Three vital legislative acts passed before the Christofi hearings, including the Capital Punishment Act of 1868, Criminal Lunacy Act of 1884 section 2 (4), and the Mental Deficiency Act 1913