Using John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men at the basis carefully apply the law to determine Lennie’s legal culpability. The defendant’s attorney claims that her client is not guilty by reason of insanity. The jurisdiction uses the M’Naghten test:
“To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must clearly be proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know it that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.” ~ M’Naghten’s Case, 8 Eng.Rep. 718 (8143)
The standard under the M’Naghten insanity test to determine whether a person is sane is did the defendant have sufficient mental capacity to know and understand what he was doing, and did he know and understand that it was [legally] wrong and a violation of the rights of another. To be “sane” and thus responsible to the law for the act committed, the defendant must be able to both know and understand the nature and quality of his act and to distinguish between right and wrong [in a legal sense] at the time of the commission of the offense.
Furthermore, the decision should be based on a burden of proof, clear and convincing evidence, that is more demanding than the preponderance of the evidence but less stringent than beyond a reasonable doubt. Clear and convincing evidence defined:
“Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that produces in your minds a firm belief or conviction that the allegations sought to be proved by the evidence are true. It is evidence so clear, direct, weighty in terms of quality, and convincing as to cause you to come to a clear conviction of the truth of the precise facts in issue.
The clear and convincing standard of proof requires that the result shall not be reached by a mere balancing of doubts or probabilities, but rather by clear evidence which causes you to be convinced that the allegations sought to be proved are true.”
Is there clear and convincing evidence to suggest that Lennie is not guilty by reason of insanity or is he guilty of committing a homicide* Provide at least three reasons, based on specific facts presented in the story (events and conversations), to support your verdict. Keep in mind these facts must relate to the standards set forth by the M’Naugten rule above.
* This can include intentional or unintentional death (e.g., premeditated homicide, voluntary or involuntary manslaughter).
