Nothing is stopping them from trying, but expect the opposition to demolish any try with procedural knowledge.
Can a person who is representing his or herself still play the insanity defense or EED defense?
Submitted 1 day ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
slazer2au@lemmy.world 1 day ago
turdas@suppo.fi 1 day ago
If anything, representing yourself should make the insanity defense stronger.
Apytele@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
When I worked forensic psych pretty much everybody who wanted to plead insanity was trying to weasel out of something horrible (time spent institutionalized NGRI is almost always waaay longer than an equivalent prison sentence so it’s only worth it if you’re going away for life anyway).
The people who were legit psychotic would just keep defending the psychosis as reality in increasingly bizarre ways. They’d demand to represent themselves because the court appointed lawyer kept trying to talk them into accepting treatment but noooo, they needed to make a public statement about the gay bar being full of alien pedos.
Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 1 day ago
What a bs. Why should I need to “represent” myself when I can just be myself.
Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
A person who is severely mentally ill may be barred from representing themselves if they would not be able to do a competent job.
See floridabar.org/…/court-amends-rule-dealing-with-t…
My thoughts on that is tbh at if a defendant was coherently and effectively serving as their own attorney in court, that would indicate to the court that they are not severely mentally ill. Or if they produced evidence like expert testimony saying they were, it could disqualify them from self representing.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You really can’t say that. Psychoses come and go, people with severe mental illness can be completely normal one day and delusional the other.
Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I guess it depends what the court wants to believe, which could be based on case law/precedent or expert testimony.