# data[].attributes.body
In the past mental illness has not been taken into consideration many were just considered criminally insane and few were able to receive treatment after trial just creating worse of a stigma and resulting in more justice systems to struggle and numbers to increase.

# data[].attributes.body
Due to court trials saying that a criminals were insane and still committed the crime. Research has been conducted in recent years to show if this is true or if mental well being and disorders result in criminals to be unable to analyze what they have done and them and raise questions if they should be responsible.

# data[].attributes.body
With the analyzation of the stigma further detail needs to be seen of how changing points in the past and the world today have handled the "criminally insane" accusations with mental illness criminal court trials.

# data[].attributes.body
Criminal insanity hides the significance of helping a mental disorder and although is the identification of someone how can not be found responsible due to a mental disorder. It lacks clear understanding in trials and is not used in the right sense to help a criminal which was why it was introduced in the first place.

# data[].attributes.body
A comparison is seen in criminal court cases in the Supreme Court now vs. then with recently new outcomes being seen of defendants being able to have a punishment but also seen treatment due to the lack of knowledge if a criminal is truly responsible. This shows a sign in trials that criminals with mental disorders are not able to be found responsible if something out of their control causes the outcome presented in court which is further what the source 10 shows.

# data[].attributes.body
Source 9 analyzed mental disorders and looked at research conducted in experiments to see if a criminal could understand they killed someone with specific disorders. Showing the significance of how mental disorders can take a toll and alter how someone reacts and thinks. In the following source, source 8 research is taken to the next step to show prove that criminals should not be found responsible for the crime the same way defendants are found not guilty when they were forced to do it. Connections our seen if it was really a crime committed it they could not control their power, reactions, or morals.

# data[].attributes.body
Mental Illness has a significant stigma with it being such a difficult thing to diagnose and also it having to be categorized complete separate since it is a newer topic in the world and news today. This has resulted in the stigma to be seen in court trials which has caused a new discussion for treatments and rethinking how diagnosis should be handled during trials by the research seen and conducted in these three sources.

# data[].attributes.body
In the United States, a case that took place in Arizona and a case in Germany showed many similarities. Defendants were put on trial for two different cases however the outcome of the trial in both was very significant. Both defendants had clear mental illness however in both trials it there was uncertainty to consider them criminally insane due to the behavioral issues seen. This resulted in both cases the trial outcomes of both defendants guilty however needed of treatment when in prison. Showing a step forward in the court system and mental illness criminals. However, both resulted in a failure as well without them being criminally insanity outcome they received a punishment that was a higher length in prison than the average inmate that committed the same crime. This is important in showing that the classification of a defendant who has a mental disorder but is not considered criminally insane needs to be altered due to a lack of support to help with treatment and injustice for people with mental disorders in the court system.

# data[].attributes.body
In Germany after a defendant was able to receive treatment due to a mental disorder diagnosis it was broadcasted. This resulted in higher amounts of defendants committing crime who had previously been diagnosed with a mental illness. Many did this to receive treatment. Similarly in California it was also seen that this was done in recent years in the late 1900s. Both show how treatment is scarce for many when it comes to mental disorders and due to the lack of support for these diagnosis's court trials our an easy way for them to be able to have a place for themselves to feel "controlled" as similarly stated in source 7.

# data[].attributes.body
When looking at the significance in both sources; how court trials have been more "aggressive" towards mental illness criminals and how treatment and discussion increase in countries shows a direct correlation. A significance is seen in the stigma presented in court trials and a result of how it has improved over the past years by the direct research of court cases now vs. then showing the importance of mental health and illnesses significance in court trials. The understanding and recent years of regulations that have been addressing the mental disorder in the courtroom it has helped reduce stigma and improved treatment. The authors are able to show this with the comparisons done of court trials in the 1800s vs court trials in the 1900s.

# data[].attributes.body
Through both journal articles the ideas are shared about mental health treatment. However in Source 6 there is clear significance shown about the outcome of mental health related cases compared to without identifying the stigma seen and both sources able to show a clear significance of with and without treatments and understanding by the jurors during court trials. It is important to explain the mental illness or have treatment for the criminal in order for a fair trial and this is seen and analyzed in both cases to prove that without explanations in trials a punishment can not be conducted fairly.

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 12: Care and Treatment of the Mentally Ill in the United States: Historical Developments and Reforms- J. P. Morrissey, & H.H. Goldman

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 12: Care and Treatment of the Mentally Ill in the United States: Historical Developments and Reforms- J. P. Morrissey, & H.H. Goldman

# data[].attributes.body
Through the studies by Joseph P. Morrissey and Howard H. Goldman as there was more mental health care and treatments, the number of criminal court trials with mental health decreased and less defendants were tried as criminally insane.
-"ly. As the movement matured, its original goal of improving mental hospital care fell by the wayside. In its place, reformers began to champion the relevance of psychiatry to the care of the feeble-minded, eugenics, control of alcoholism management of abnormal children, treatment of criminals, prevention of prostitution and dependency, and the problems of industrial productivity"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 11: The "Captain of Köpenick" and the Transformation of German Criminal Justice, 1891-1914- B.C. Hett

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 11: The "Captain of Köpenick" and the Transformation of German Criminal Justice, 1891-1914- B.C. Hett

# data[].attributes.body
The diagnosis was mentally insane for Voight and a debate had begun due to this in Germany. The author looks at the conclusions and compares if the criminal justice system allegations during this time period have benefited other cases to follow.
-"At the same time, in more "ordinary" criminal proceedings, the courts were drawing on new forms of evidence, which generally had the effect of lessening the defendant s guilt or exonerating him or her altogether. The most important category of new evidence was psychological. The Prussian Criminal Code of 1851 had provided for the defense of mental illness in blunt terms that equated it to the defense of duress: "A crime or misdemeanor is not present if the culture, at the time of the deed was insane or idiotic, or if the free formation of his will was rendered impossible by violence or threats"

# data[].attributes.body
Through the research seen it was clear that mental illness had a significant impact on a criminal to commit the crime and when observed the hypothesis was proven that mental illness alters criminals' personalities and reactions.
"In addition, the court found that the GBMI verdict deprives a defendant of due process because it imposes conflicting burdens of proof where an NGRI defense is presented. To achieve an NGRI verdict, a defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she is insane. However, if the state seeks a GBMI verdict, the defendant must prove that he or she has a mental illness, but not to the extent of insanity"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 9: Criminal Incompetency- American Bar Association 

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 9: Criminal Incompetency- American Bar Association 

# data[].attributes.body
The authors investigated how criminal incompetence in court cases has been successful or unsuccessful with the treatment of a criminal and outcome after the trial. When a criminal is classified under insanity due to a mental illness it is found they are unable to process criminal responsibility. This considers them to not be responsible for the crime committed. However, this causes their disorder to worsen because they are not able to receive treatment in the prison system and our limit to an extent which is proven by the research presented by the authors.

-"Stephen Wesley Hatfield was charged with first-degree murder and malicious wounding. He was found competent to stand trial, but, after the hearing, attempted suicide. Against advice of counsel, Hatfield decided to plead guilty. The court accepted the plea and sentenced him. Hatfield argued on appeal that he had been incompetent to enter a guilty plea. The state supreme court remanded for the court to engage in a colloquy with Hatfield to ensure that he understood his counsel's reasons for opposing the guilty plea. 413"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 8: SUPREME COURT MENTAL HEALTH PRECEDENT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS (9/09)Mary Ann Bernard

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 8: SUPREME COURT MENTAL HEALTH PRECEDENT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS (9/09)Mary Ann Bernard

# data[].attributes.body
The author from the University of Chicago conducted research on different Supreme Court trials with Mental Illness being taken into account. The author analyzed how these specific examples and the implications of mental illness being a cause were important in these trials. By analyzing in chronological order the author was able to conduct comparisons over time and prove the significant difference in trials mentioning the criminal’s mental illness and actually analyzing it for a different outcome. The trials in the early 2000s compared to the late 1900s showed a significant difference. When the mental disorder was taken into account the defendants were able to receive treatment with the outcome they received. Helping to support there disorders rather than it being developed worse in the prison system.
"O’Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975). Mentally ill plaintiff was confined without treatment for 15 years. Held: states cannot constitutionally confine, “without more,” a person who is not a danger to others or to himself. The latter category includes the suicidal and the “gravely disabled,” who are unable to “avoid the hazards of freedom” either alone or with the aid of willing family or friends. 422 U.S. at 575 and n.9. As the plaintiff received no treatment, the Court expressly reserved the question “whether the provision of treatment, standing alone, can ever constitutionally justify involuntary confinement or, if it can, how much and what kind of treatment would suffice. . . . “ Id. at n.10. The Court has never revisited this issue"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 7: Study: Mental illness takes toll on California justice system.- published by Mental Health Weekly

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 7: Study: Mental illness takes toll on California justice system.- published by Mental Health Weekly

# data[].attributes.body
Through the research conducted to see the California justice system in comparison with prisons similarities. The researchers questioned why there was a rise of prisoners diagnosed with mental illness in the prison system. The California justice system has done many surveys of criminals to try and understand why numbers were so high. Many of the mentally ill criminals did not even know why they committed the crime, how they committed the crime, and higher percentages did not even know it occurred until told by someone else. When surveyed criminals were unable to answer questions about their crime and many answered differently than what they said in the court room even saying it was a different victim, weapon, and crime committed.

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 6: Mental Health and Mental Illness: Out of the Closet?- Carol T. Mowbray and Mark C. Holter 

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 6: Mental Health and Mental Illness: Out of the Closet?- Carol T. Mowbray and Mark C. Holter 

# data[].attributes.body
Through the research, the authors found how mental illnesses are seen genetically and the comparison of life and court trials develops the stigma accusing criminals and causing a higher punishment and result. The author specifically looks at murder trials in the 1950s and criminals diagnosed vs. undiagnosed. There was a high amount for defendants with mental disorders to receive the life sentence or more extreme when undiagnosed were able to get 30-50 years in jail or even less. This is able to show even if accounted for in the courtroom diagnosed criminals are unable to stand up in a courtroom and communicate in a way to support themselves.
"The extensive changes in mental health services over the past 25 years negate the possibility of an overall research summary. Instead, we identify six pivotal topics to explore in-depth: (1) the paradigm shift to a biopsychosocial mental illness etiology, (2) the organization and financing of mental health care, (3) community‐based programs for adults with serious mental illness, (4) the role of families and consumers, (5) services for children and adolescents with serious emotional or mental disturbances, and (6) the interface with criminal justice. The article concludes with a discussion of future issues in mental health services research and the role of social work researchers"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 5: Correctional Policy for Offenders with Mental Illness: Creating a New Paradigm for Recidivism Reduction- J.L. Skeem, S. Manchak, & J.K. Peterson

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 5: Correctional Policy for Offenders with Mental Illness: Creating a New Paradigm for Recidivism Reduction- J.L. Skeem, S. Manchak, & J.K. Peterson

# data[].attributes.body
The different court trials from the 1970s-1980s were researched throughout time and showed significant differences the courts made in regards to the mental and genetic illnesses that changed the outcome. Through the author’s findings, the development of the hypothesis is answered, defendants with mental illnesses are mediated by system bias and stigma. Through the development in the 1900s and changes to the classification of criminal insanity, the author presents statistics showing that mental illness criminals are more likely to receive a harsh punishment rather than it being dressed as criminal insanity which finds them not responsible for the crime committed. It was also found that 50% of inmates with mental disorders are more likely in the year 1981 to commit suicide than without mental disorders.
-"Since 1995, the National GAINS Center (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2010) has focused intently on addressing the situation. More recently, the CSG Justice Center (2009) has been leading "an unprecedented national effort to help local, state, and federal policymakers and criminal justice and mental health professionals improve the response to people with mental illness who come into contact with the criminal justice system."

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 4: The Uneasy Entente between Legal Insanity and Mens Rea: Beyond Clark v. Arizona- Stephen J. Morse and Morris B. Hoffman

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 4: The Uneasy Entente between Legal Insanity and Mens Rea: Beyond Clark v. Arizona- Stephen J. Morse and Morris B. Hoffman

# data[].attributes.body
Through looking at the details of criminal responsibility and the constitution with comparison to mental disorder and criminal responsibility. The implications of the study show, criminals are likely to get higher punishments and outcomes if mental illness is mentioned in court trials. This was specifically seen in the Clark v. Arizona case for comparison. Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735, is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the constitutionality of the insanity defense used by Arizona. The Court affirmed the murder conviction of a man with paranoid schizophrenia for killing a police officer.
-"In Clark v. Arizona? the Supreme Court recently had one of its rare opportunities to clarify some of these issues.4 The questions Clark presented were whether Arizona's unusually narrow insanity defense test violated the defendant's substantive due process rights and whether an Arizona rule that excluded virtually all expert evidence concerning mental disorder offered for the purpose of negating mens rea violated procedural due process.5"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 3: Genetics and Responsibility: To Know the Criminal From the Crime-N.A. Farahany, & J.E.Coleman

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 3: Genetics and Responsibility: To Know the Criminal From the Crime-N.A. Farahany, & J.E.Coleman

# data[].attributes.body
The authors examine how behavior genetics alters how a person thinks and reacts. By looking into past documents from court trials the author is able to acknowledge and look at mental disorders from a courtroom setting. It is common for criminals to not be able to understand and process hearings correctly which makes it easier for defefandts to be accused of worse and sets them up to be vulnerable to more punishments. This was presented by the author from a 1990 court trial where the criminal said he committed the crime multiple times when really with DNA test he only did once. He was sentenced to the death penalty rather than a life sentence n prison due to an accusation he made because his brain was altered by his disorder to do this and was a side effect resulting in this.
-"So far, few defendants have offered evidence of a behavioral predisposition to negate men's rea or as a defense of diminished capacity.44 In part, this may be due to the conceptual implausibility of such a defense, or at least the conceptual difficulty of explaining why a behavioral predisposition would negate scienter as that notion is understood in the criminal law.45 Rather than introducing
behavioral predispositions to negate or reduce the degree of scienter producing the criminal act, defendant"

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 2: The Criminal Psychopath: History, Neuroscience, Treatment, and Economics- Kent A. Kiehl and Morris B. Hoffman

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 2: The Criminal Psychopath: History, Neuroscience, Treatment, and Economics- Kent A. Kiehl and Morris B. Hoffman

# data[].attributes.body
The authors directly examined how the use of forensic science tying it to the origin of behavioral psychology is connected to court systems throughout history. By comparing when forensic psychology was used in court trials to analyze the outcome of a crime and decide what the criminal outcome would be and comparing to when this was not mentioned it created a clear understanding for readers in this source to be able to tell significant differences.
-"The scientist-author of this article has spent the last 15 years imaging the brains of psychopaths in prison and has accumulated the world's largest forensic database on the psychopathic brain. The findings from this data and others,11 summarized in Part IV, strongly suggest that all psychopaths share common neurological traits that are becoming relatively easy to diagnose using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).1

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 1: Behavioral Genetics, and Crime in Context- Owen D. Jones

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 1: Behavioral Genetics, and Crime in Context- Owen D. Jones

# data[].attributes.body
This source discusses criminal insanity in context and what it truly means. The adding by the supreme court of criminally insane to say that a criminal is not responsible for a case made the debate begin of mental disorders in regard to criminals and in this source, it looks into details of the pros and cons of the identification of criminally insane.
-"To say a behavior is genetically influenced? even with high
heritability? is not to say it is inevitable, unalterable, or "determined"

# data[].attributes.body
How has mental illness in the past been addressed in the criminal justice system? (Historical)

# data[].attributes.body
Past experiments and court trials that showed a criminal was not responsible due to there mental disorder

# data[].attributes.body
Criminal Court Cases that had turning points and left a discussion for mental illness.

# data[].attributes.body
Throughout many court trials, significant similarities have been seen that many criminals are diagnosed with a mental illness disorder resulting in multiple outcomes that are drastic from the ideal court trial. Showing unfair treatment being seen. This can be seen throughout research and comparisons of criminals and mental illnesses throughout history that resulted in a stigma created.

# data[].attributes.body
Stigma of Mental Illness in Court Trials