Commentary

Insanity defense has rightful place

Gary Crooks
For the editorial board

There are those who choose to commit crimes and those who cannot choose. The state of Idaho chooses to ignore the latter. It's cold and heartless.

The short-term outrage over what Kootenai County Public Defender John Adams reportedly called the jury of women who convicted his mentally ill client has obliterated a long-term problem: Idaho prohibits the insanity defense.

Why? Because 20 years ago, John Hinckley Jr. shot President Reagan to win Jodie Foster's affection, and was found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Idaho wasn't the only state to change its laws after the Hinckley verdict. But only two others -- Montana and Utah -- instituted bans, allowing such testimony to be considered only as a mitigating factor, rather than as a defense.

About a dozen other states replaced insanity defenses with the option to find defendants "guilty, but insane." This puts defendants in the prison system while treating them for mental illnesses. "Not guilty by reason of insanity" places defendants in mental institutions for incarceration and treatment.

Either way, the defendants are kept from the public. Hinckley is in his 20th year at a mental hospital.

But wait! Isn't this insanity defense just a loophole that criminals crawl through? Many people think so, but it's rarely attempted and usually fails.

For every Hinckley, there are hundreds of others who plead insanity but lose at trial. Barry Loukaitis, the teenager who gunned down two Moses Lake students and a teacher, failed to persuade the court that he was insane even though he had a history of mental illness. So did Kip Kinkel, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Sirhan Sirhan, David "Son of Sam" Berkowitz and Ted Bundy.

Since the Hinckley verdict, the nation has learned a lot about mental illness and the dangers if it goes untreated. It bears repeating that most people sent to prison get out some day. It's better to treat them than to let them fall further into the clutches of their imaginary demons.

In reality, mental illness alone is not enough to prove insanity.

In the state of Washington, the defendants must show that the mental defect or disorder prevented them from knowing right from wrong at the time the crime was committed. And even if they succeed, they are sent to mental institutions.

The insanity defense is raised in just 3 percent to 5 percent of criminal cases. It only succeeds when juries are persuaded that defendants were so delusional they didn't know what happened.

In Idaho, there ought to be a law that recognizes that some people are so ill they can't make the distinction between right and wrong.

Gary Crooks/For the editorial board

Back to Top