what is the difference between Mc Naughten rule and Durham rule ?
The McNaughten rule and the Durham rule are two legal standards used to determine whether a defendant in a criminal case is legally responsible for their actions.
The McNaughten rule, also known as the “right-wrong” test, is a standard used in most U.S. states and many other countries. It holds that a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity if, at the time of the crime, they did not know the nature and quality of their actions, or if they did not know that their actions were wrong. Under this standard, the defendant’s mental state at the time of the crime is the primary consideration.
The Durham rule, also known as the “product” test, is a standard used in some U.S. states and was adopted by the federal courts for a time in the mid-20th century. 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.
Overall, the main difference between the McNaughten and Durham rules is that the former focuses on the defendant’s knowledge of right and wrong, while the latter focuses on the connection between their mental state and their criminal 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.