Using Multiple Personality Disorder as Legal Defense

by curield on October 31, 2013 - 8:43pm

This article is about the murder trial of a man named Thomas Husky, who allegedly kiled 3 woman. The evidence shows that tommy committed the murders and tommy admits to doing so himself. The problem for the jury is that tommy is pleading insanity and claims he has Dissociative identity disorder. He claims that these actions were not committed by him but by his other personality called Kyle. Kyle can be heard on videotapes confessing to the murders but saying, “don’t call me tommy”. The prosecution maintains that the evidence points towards him in every way and that “Kyle” is a figment of his imagination. They say he invented this as an excuse and cannot be considered insane. The defense maintains that Thomas is a quiet reserved man who suffers from mental illness and that the videotapes prove this claim. They say he was not even aware of the murders. He says he gets sever headaches and blacks out often. The jury has been had a hard time reaching a conclusion but blames it on the fact that there is not proceeding that declares someone mentally ill and still hold them accountable for their crimes.This article is about the murder trial of a man named Thomas Husky. The evidence shows that tommy committed the murders and tommy admits to doing so himself. The problem for the jury is that tommy is pleading insanity and claims he has Dissociative identity disorder. He claims that these actions were not committed by him but by his other personality called Kyle. Kyle can be heard on videotapes confessing to the murders but saying, “don’t call me tommy”. The prosecution maintains that the evidence points towards him in every way and that “Kyle” is a figment of his imagination. They say he invented this as an excuse and cannot be considered insane. The defense maintains that Thomas is a quiet reserved man who suffers from mental illness and that the videotapes prove this claim. They say he was not even aware of the murders. He says he gets sever headaches and blacks out often. The jury has been had a hard time reaching a conclusion but blames it on the fact that there is not proceeding that declares someone mentally ill and still hold them accountable for their crimes.

 

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=132119&page=3

Comments

I strongly agree with the jury in this case about the issues. There is a certain level of empathy that needs to be maintained but the main concern is the safety of others. Although I think the proceedings should be different for someone who is suffering from mental illness, I also believe that the penaltys for harming another person should be as severe as someone who is not mentally ill. The proper help should be offered while administering proper punishment for the actions taken by the individual.

I think this is a very controversial issue that we have even discussed in class. No one will have a firm answer on what to do with this case but I think the jury has been handling this case perfectly. The prosecution only want to do their job, which is to give him the death sentence, but the jury are being wise about it. My personal opinion though is that no matter which mental illness you have if you killed two people you should be held accountable for it regardless of the circumstances, so I agree with you that he should be punished for the actions he has taken

thank you very much for you comment. it is clear that someone with an illness should be helped, but when it comes to people dying action has to be taken. the death penalty might not be justified, but a strict form of punishment has to applied

About the author