Does pleading insanity work as a defense for bank robbery?

Does Pleading Insanity Work as a Defense for Bank Robbery?

When someone robs a bank, they’re obviously doing something crazy right? I mean who in their right mind would try to steal money from a bank in broad daylight surrounded by security guards and cameras? Seems like you’d have to be a little bit insane to attempt something so bold and risky. So it makes sense that some bank robbers have tried to use an insanity defense when they get caught and charged. But does it actually work? Can pleading insanity get you off the hook for robbing a bank? Let’s dig into this tricky legal issue.

What Does It Mean to Plead Insanity?

First, what exactly does it mean to plead insanity in a criminal trial? Basically your lawyer is arguing that at the time you committed the crime, you were unable to understand what you were doing was wrong or control your actions due to severe mental illness or defect. There’s a few different legal standards for proving insanity that vary by state, but generally you have to show you had a serious mental condition that prevented you from comprehending reality or acting rationally when you robbed that bank.

This is different from saying you have mental health issues like depression or anxiety. Lots of criminals do. But those don’t typically impair your sense of right and wrong enough to meet the insanity plea standards. You usually have to show you were in psychosis, detached from reality, and unable to make rational choices when you decided to take the money. That’s a very high bar to reach.

Insanity Defenses are Rarely Successful

Because the bar for proving insanity is set so high, very few defendants are actually able to successfully plead insanity. Estimates suggest only around 1% of all criminal cases involve an insanity defense, and of those only around 25% are successful. So statistically, it’s pretty rare for someone charged with bank robbery to get off by claiming they were too mentally ill to be held responsible. Most of the time prosecutors can show the defendant understood what they were doing was wrong.

That said, insanity defenses do occasionally work in bank robbery cases where there is clear evidence of severe mental illness. For example, in one 2010 case a woman with schizophrenia who wasn’t taking her medication was found not guilty by reason of insanity after robbing a bank because expert psychiatrists testified she was experiencing psychotic delusions during the crime. So it’s possible, just not very likely.

The Burden of Proof Falls on the Defense

One major hurdle for defendants pleading insanity is that the burden of proof is on them, not the prosecution. They have to conclusively demonstrate through psychiatric evaluations, medical records, expert witnesses, and testimony that they meet the legal standard for insanity. Prosecutors don’t have to prove the defendant was sane. This makes successfully arguing an insanity defense very difficult.

In addition, prosecutors often have psychiatric experts evaluate the defendant and testify about their mental state as well. So there ends up being a battle of the experts with psychiatrists arguing both sides. And juries tend to be skeptical of insanity claims, especially in serious crimes like bank robbery where the defendant has clear motivation ($$$).

What Happens if the Insanity Defense Works?

If a defendant does manage to successfully plead insanity for bank robbery, what happens? Well they aren’t just set free. An insanity acquittal requires the court to commit the defendant to a secure mental health facility. How long they stay depends on the laws of that state. The goal is to treat their mental illness and prevent them from harming themselves or others. They have to demonstrate to a judge they are no longer dangerous before being released from custody.

In a few cases, defendants have spent even more time confined in mental institutions after an insanity acquittal than they would have if convicted and sentenced to prison. So while they avoid criminal punishment, the loss of freedom and forced treatment can still be significant consequences. There are pros and cons to pleading insanity vs. accepting a plea deal.

Not All Crimes Are Equal When It Comes to Insanity

It’s also worth noting that insanity defenses have a better chance of succeeding in crimes of passion like murder than premeditated crimes like robbery or fraud. It’s hard to convince a jury you weren’t thinking clearly during a crime you deliberately planned out and executed. Bank robbery takes coordination and logical steps, which undercuts claims of legal insanity.

Whereas crimes committed in a sudden rage or psychological break can more plausibly be blamed on mental defect. So while insanity may get some murderers acquitted, robbers have a tougher case to make even if they have psychiatric issues.

Should We Rethink How Mental Illness Is Handled in the Justice System?

The insanity defense highlights some flaws in how the legal system handles mental illness. Right now, the options are essentially convicting mentally ill defendants as if they were rational criminals, or acquitting them as if they had no agency whatsoever. There’s little room for a middle ground that treats them compassionately while still imposing consequences and rehabilitation.

Perhaps we need more nuanced ways of assessing culpability and sentencing those who commit crimes under the influence of serious psychiatric disorders. This could help balance justice and mercy when dealing with lawbreakers who have severe mental health challenges. But for now, insanity defenses remain a risky long-shot for most bank robbery defendants.

The Bottom Line

While it may seem crazy to try robbing a bank, it’s quite hard to successfully argue you were legally insane while doing so. The evidence requirement is extremely high, prosecutors vigorously challenge such claims, and juries are skeptical. So in most cases, defendants are better off accepting a plea deal than attempting an insanity defense. It rarely works for premeditated crimes like bank robbery. Our legal system just isn’t very sympathetic to mental health excuses when large sums of money are stolen.

That said, insanity acquittals do occasionally happen when the circumstances are just right. If bank robbers can convincingly demonstrate through medical records, expert witnesses, and testimony that severe delusions or psychosis drove their behavior, they may be found not criminally responsible and committed to psychiatric care. But it’s still an uphill battle given the assumptions baked into our laws. Perhaps we need to rethink how justice and mental health intersect in these difficult cases. But for now, don’t count on an insanity plea getting you off easy for taking money that isn’t yours, even if you’re mind wasn’t totally right in that moment.

References

Callahan, L. A., Mayer, C., & Steadman, H. J. (1987). Insanity defense reform in the United States – post-Hinckley. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter, 11(1), 54-59.

McKinley, J. (2010, March 23). Woman who robbed bank is found not guilty by reason of insanity. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/nyregion/24robber.html