The insanity defense is a controversial topic that tends to invoke negative emotion throughout the public. The negative connotation associated with this defense is directly correlated with the media's portrayal of it. The media has suppressed facts and statistics about the insanity defense when reporting about it, which leaves the audience uninformed. The media also publishes stories too early, saying that defendants "may" or "could" use the defense, which in turn causes readers to believe that someone who is sane is trying to plead insanity. One last issue involving the media is that fictional television shows and movies depict mentally ill persons in a negative and exaggerated manner. All of these flaws in media reporting have caused the public to be openly against the insanity defense when it is used in court. These negative connotations have caused states such as Idaho to abolish the use of the insanity plea in court and have caused numerous amounts of truly mentally insane people to be thrown in jail without proper treatment. In order to fix these flaws and ensure that truly mentally ill persons get the help they need, the media must include facts in stories to help readers fully understand the insanity defense, not publish stories until all of the facts are known, and depict mentally ill persons on fictional television and movies correctly. 

The insanity defense and its legitimacy are very important to those who are truly mentally ill. With the insanity defense, they can get the help that incarceration would not give them. It should be the government's top priority to not only punish those who did wrong but to also help those who cannot control themselves in order for them to be safe around civilians. It should also be the media's top priority to publish the facts involving the defense and mentally ill persons. The insanity defense, although flawed, ensures public safety. As someone who originally thought negatively of the insanity defense, I believe it is important for the public to know the facts about it. It is especially important for the public to know the facts because of individuals such as James Holmes and Eddie Routh who are trying to plead insanity. An easy way for the public to know the facts about the insanity plea is for the media to report it accurately.  

William H. Weaver argues in his article titled The Unpopularity and Improbability of the Insanity Defense that the public has the wrong impression of the insanity plea. While people believe that the insanity plea is unfairly used quite frequently, the truth is that it is rarely used, and the media plays a role in this issue. "The media jumps at every chance to diagnose a questionable subject as insane" (Weaver, 109). It is unbelievably rare for a defendant to use the insanity plea because the defendant himself must prove his insanity and those who may get the insanity plea will be incarcerated far longer than they would without pleading (Weaver, 117). Weaver has a bachelor's in philosophy and is attending law school, so this source is biased towards the criminal justice system and the facts that follow the insanity defense. Since Weaver is studying law, he is able to argue for the defense by proving how it benefits our criminal justice system. He also argues the ethics of the media and their reporting of the defense.

The American Law and Legal Information Online Library provides important reasoning as to why the insanity defense is not corrupt. If a criminal were to corruptly use the insanity defense to get out of a murder, then he or she would end up serving more time in prison than he or she would without using the plea (Law.Jrank). Also, contrary to popular belief, the insanity plea is mostly used on misdemeanors. Finally, only 20 percent of the small amount of those who plead insanity are found insane by a jury (Law.Jrank). This online American law library proves how risky it is for criminals to plead not guilty by reason of insanity. Pleading insane will only make their charges worse, and the insanity plea is not often used for murder cases. The criminal would have a better chance getting off on parole than trying to get out of prison time by pleading insane. This source proves through factual evidence and statistics that the insanity defense is not used as often as the public believes. This is a credible source because it is an online library providing information on legal topics. 

Multiple psychiatry experts provide feedback on the insanity defense and how one is proven insane. They include the difficulty of proving one insane because of the constant changing of the insanity plea over the years. The authors also include that once one is proven insane, he or she is not free from any incarceration. Depending on the state, that person could either have less confinement time or more confinement time if the insanity defense had not been raised (Feuerstein, "The Insanity Defense"). It is explained that the two requirements for a criminal act  --  knowing that one is committing a crime and the act being a crime itself  --  are what must be missing when someone pleads insanity (Feuerstein, "The Insanity Defense"). Commonly known as mens rea and actus reus, the defendant must prove to the court that he or she was incapable of forming mens rea to have a chance at winning the case.  The multiple psychiatry experts who wrote this article are credible because they have first-hand experiences with the insanity plea by testifying with defendants. They prove that the insanity plea should still be invoked by showing that the public will be safer if those who are truly mentally ill are in mentally ill hospitals.  

The media and its influence on the insanity defense is definitely arguable. The general public believes that the insanity plea is used far more often than it is. Also, there have been cases where those who were clearly insane and needed help were found guilty. To help address my issue, I will need to add examples of this and ways in which it can be solved by the media for the betterment of mentally ill persons. All of my sources agree on the fact that the insanity defense is rarely used and rarely successful, but one calls for reform while the others do not. After researching through all of my articles, I do not think that the insanity defense needs to be reformed; the media needs to report the insanity defense more accurately. I believe that including examples of specific court cases will make my argument stronger and also help me reach the 2,500-word minimum. 

