...future cases is not unlike that followed by the New Hampshire court since 1870. It is simply that an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful...the product of mental disease or mental defect."* 14. In 1954 a group of psychiatrists centred on the Menninger Clinic and -called the Group for the...

...these problems do not arise because of the much-discussed Durham test, Under the Durham test, "[A]n accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect" (214 F. 2d at 87-1—875). The Durham rule is thus the standard applied in the District in...

...advances of psychiatry when, in 1954, he wrote the opinion in the famous "Durham Case" holding "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful...was the product of mental disease or mental defect. * * *" Bolitha James Laws, 66, chief judge, US District Court, District of Columbia, is a leader in...

...illustrated by the experience of the District of Columbia under the Durham rule. Under that test, "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect."87 In Blacker v. United States,8* the court felt compelled to grant a new trial because the...

...Durham rule. This formulation of legal insanity, based on Durham v. United States, concluded that "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful...was the product of mental disease or mental defect." 59 Initially, this new test was considered truly revolutionary and was greeted quite favorably by both...

...defense in the case of Monte Durham (Durham v. United States). The rule we now hold is simply that the accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful...was the product of mental disease or mental defect. We use "disease" in the sense of a condition which is considered capable of improving or deteriorating....

...requirements of law.'"* The product or Durham test insists that, in the words of Judge Bazelon, "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect."10 The presence test is yet broader: it is not necessary, on this view, to show that the unlawful...

...catalog of acceptable justifications for a claim of non-culpability under M'Naghten by holding that "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease" (Mears & Gatchel, 1979, p. 330). Following the name of the defendant (Durham) and the presiding justice...

...developed another alternative to the M'Naughten rules — the Durham rule, which provides that "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of a mental disease or defect." The Durham court found that the traditional "rightwrong" test focused...

...new "test" for insanity cases, presumably more scientific and enlightened than the older ones: "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect."70 The Durham rule was controversial from the day it was born. It was supposed to be clearer,...