Durham‘s rule and Curren‘s rule ?
The Durham rule and Curren’s rule are two legal standards used to determine whether a defendant in a criminal case is legally responsible for their actions.
The Durham rule, also known as the “product” test, was adopted by the federal courts in the United States in 1954. It holds that a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity if their criminal behavior was the “product” of a mental disease or defect. This standard places more emphasis on the relationship between the defendant’s mental state and their criminal behavior, rather than on their awareness of the nature and quality of their actions.
Curren’s rule, also known as the “irresistible impulse” test, is another standard used in some U.S. states. It holds that a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity if they were unable to control their actions at the time of the crime due to a mental disease or defect. Under this standard, the defendant may have known that their actions were wrong, but were unable to control their behavior due to their mental condition.
Overall, the main difference between the Durham rule and Curren’s rule is that the former focuses on the defendant’s mental state and the causal relationship between their mental condition and their criminal behavior, while the latter focuses on the defendant’s ability to control their behavior. However, it is important to note that different jurisdictions may use different standards, and the legal standards for determining insanity can vary depending on the time and place.