When killing isn't murder: psychiatric and psychological defences to murder when the insanity defence is not applicable.
OBJECTIVE
This paper describes psychiatric and psychological defences to murder where the defence of insanity is not applicable. The charges of murder and manslaughter are outlined. Self-defence, sane and insane automatism, provocation, diminished responsibility, duress, necessity and novel defences are discussed.


CONCLUSIONS
The complexities of psychological and psychiatric expert evidence are highlighted as well as the fact that legal decisions are not always consistent with medical or scientific theory. It is concluded that this is a controversial and evolving area of mental health law and mental health professionals have an educative role and a responsibility to provide testimony that is supported by the best possible evidence.
Samuels
Anthony
A
Director of Training, Justice Health, NSW, Australia. jenant@bigpond.net.au
O'Driscoll
Colmán
C
Allnutt
Stephen
S
D001315:Australia; D005104:Expert Testimony; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry / Q000266:history* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D049670:History, 17th Century; D049671:History, 18th Century; D049672:History, 19th Century; D049673:History, 20th Century; D049674:History, 21st Century; D006708:Homicide / Q000266:history* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007298:Insanity Defense / Q000266:history*; D009520:New Zealand; D011584:Psychology / Q000266:history* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*