If you were to assess psycopaths who committed a crime, will you judge them as morally and criminally liable? Why or why not?
Insanity may be asserted as defense. Insanity can be a valid defense if it affects one's reasoning processes – his or her cognitive capacity – not “just” affect emotion or volition. Some criminal laws relies on the M’Naghten Rules to define the test for insanity. The M’Naghten Rules require that: (1) an individual suffers from a “defect of reason”, which is (2) caused by a “disease of the mind”, and, as a result, (3) he or she does not know the “nature and quality” of the act or that it was wrong. In other words, if an accused lacks the necessary capacities such as cognition and volition, he or she is not responsible and cannot be held criminally liable for his or her actions.
According to Eshleman 2009, judgment about individuals’ moral responsibility relate to views about, first of all, their relevant capacities to evaluate reasons for acting, secondly, about their possibilities to act freely, and thirdly, about possible excusing factors. For instance, Psycho-paths are seen by many moral psychologists relevantly impaired in the sense that they lack the possession of moral concepts and the capacity to apply them. In other words, psychopaths are amoral beings lacking in moral concern and sometimes even overflowing with ill will, and because of this, they are not morally responsible moral agents (Fine and Kennett 2004, Kennett 2002)
What is your perspective? Are they liable? Or not?
