This paper discusses how the legal definition of criminal insanity has been altered several times in the Norwegian criminal law, most recently in June 2019. There are difficulties in communicating between psychiatric experts, legal experts, and lay judges, since the description and understanding of psychotic cognition as well as the definition of legal terms are not equally understood.
Not all insanity cases are clear-cut. The Norwegian forensic experts must not conclude that the charged person is considered ‘psychotic’ in the legal sense if they are not clinically sure of this. The courts, on the other hand, must not conclude that a person is ‘sane’ if there is doubt about this. This paper discusses how there is little practical knowledge of how experts and courts handle such doubts, and highlights the lack of discussion of these questions in the legal sources.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.