Appreciation vs Knowledge
Definition
The MPC and Canadian Criminal Code use 'appreciate' rather than 'know,' requiring a deeper, emotionally integrated understanding of the nature or wrongfulness of the act, not merely rote factual awareness.
- Jurisdictions using it
- Model Penal Code (US) and Canadian Criminal Code
- Contrast term
- M'Naghten's 'know'
- Standard type
- Volitional and cognitive, not purely cognitive
Common questions
Why does the word choice between 'know' and 'appreciate' matter in an insanity defence?+
'Know' under M'Naghten sets a narrow cognitive bar that a defendant can meet even while severely disordered, whereas 'appreciate' asks whether the disorder blocked a genuine emotional grasp of wrongfulness, which is easier for the defence to satisfy with evidence of delusion or affective flattening.
Does an appreciation standard mean more defendants succeed with an insanity plea?+
It generally broadens the class of qualifying mental states compared to M'Naghten, since a defendant can intellectually recite that an act is illegal while still lacking the appreciation the statute requires, though outcomes still depend on expert testimony and jury interpretation.
Related terms
- BNS § 22
- India's insanity defence provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, replacing IPC § 84: an act is not an offence if done...
- Durham Rule
- The 1954 US Court of Appeals (DC Circuit) product test: an accused is not criminally responsible if the unlawful act was the...
- Guilty but Mentally Ill (GBMI)
- A US verdict alternative introduced in some states from 1975: the defendant is found guilty (and sentenced) but is entitled to psychiatric...
- Hari Singh Gond (2008)
- Indian Supreme Court ruling setting out the four elements for establishing the IPC § 84 (now BNS § 22) defence: mental illness...
- IDRA 1984
- Insanity Defense Reform Act 1984: US federal legislation passed after John Hinckley's acquittal that eliminated the volitional prong, raised the standard to...
- M'Naghten Rules
- The 1843 English House of Lords formulation providing that a defendant is not criminally responsible if, at the time of the offence,...
- MPC § 4.01 Substantial-Capacity Test
- The American Law Institute's 1962 insanity formulation: a person lacks criminal responsibility if, as a result of mental disease or defect, they...