| In judicial practice,the differences in the determination of the criminal capacity of mental patients mainly focus on the different definitions of the concept of mental illness,the division of responsibilities between the judge and the psychiatrist,and so on.The concept of mental patients in law and psychiatry has a different standard of definitions;this difference is mainly reflected in the psychiatry and criminal law on the definition of the concept of mental illness.The starting point and purpose of the definition of psychiatric concept in psychiatry is to better distinguish different characters of different mental illness and different characters of psychosis and other similar diseases to facilitate the medical practitioners for the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness,but the purpose of the definition of psychosis in criminal law is mainly for the judge in the practice of criminal law to better determine whether the mental patients have the criminal capacity and the size of criminal capacity.The different starting points and objectives defined by the two different disciplines on the concept of psychosis determine that the concept of psychosis of medical can be used for reference in the criminal law research and judicial practice,but the concept of psychiatry cannot be copied.There are three main problems in the judicial practice of criminal capacity.The first is the question of the source of power in legal cases of a psychiatric expert,which is the subjective legitimacy of a psychiatric expert in judicial cases;Secondly,the non-scientific and subjectivity in two sides of the psychiatric evaluation bring the misjudgment risk to judicial adjudicators.Namely psychiatric appraisal opinions are non-unique.Thirdly,in the judicial verdict cases about mental patients,the problem is the opinion conflict between psychiatric experts and judges,which is the trade-off problem when decisions made by judge based on law knowledge and identification results made by psychiatric experts are conflicting.The difficulties encountered in judicial practice need to learn the beneficial experience from foreign countries.This is the reason that constitutes the third part of the writing.In the study of mental patients identification of criminal responsibility,the development of the legal system in Britain and America has been very complete.They accumulate abundant theoretical and practical experience and creatively put forward many judicial rules,such as McLaughton Rule,Irresistible Impulse Rule,Durham Rule,Model Criminal Code,Comprehensive Crime Control Rules,whose existence not only demonstrates the wisdom and creativity of judicial official in working practice,but also provides important reference to solve mental patients’ criminal cases for other counties.On the base of reference practical experience of other countries,we should implement it into mental patients identification of criminal responsibility practice,which is the focus of the fourth part.The development about mental patients identification of criminal responsibility in our country,besides reference practical experience from other countries and enrich our country mental patients identification of criminal responsibility practical theories,corresponding institutional support security working should be done better,which includes three basic systems: Mental patient supervision system,the compensation system of the victim state and the mental patient treatment system. |
