这是谋杀还是精神错乱？对1865年一次成功的阵发性精神错乱抗辩的反应。

Was it murder or insanity? Reactions to a successful paroxysmal insanity plea in 1865.

作者信息

Spiegel A D, Spiegel A M

机构信息

Preventive Medicine & Community Health, State University of New York, Health Science Center College of Medicine, Brooklyn 11203.

出版信息

Women Health. 1992;18(2):69-86. doi: 10.1300/J013v18n02_05.

DOI:10.1300/J013v18n02_05

PMID:1632102

Abstract

This 1865 Harris/Burroughs trial marked the first time that the paroxysmal [temporary] insanity plea was supported by expert medical testimony in a U.S. courtroom. Jurors agreed that the female defendant was insane at the time of the shooting due to being "crossed in love and suffering from painful dysmenorrhea." Attitudinal stances of the legal system, health professionals, newspapers and the public are illustrated. By merely changing the antebellum language, the reactions could be recycled into our current tabloid newspapers and titillating TV programs as if the tragedy occurred yesterday.

摘要

1865年的哈里斯/伯勒斯审判标志着阵发性（暂时性）精神错乱抗辩首次在美国法庭上得到医学专家证词的支持。陪审员们一致认为，该女性被告在开枪时精神错乱，原因是“爱情受挫且患有痛苦的痛经”。文中展现了法律系统、医疗专业人员、报纸和公众的态度立场。仅仅通过改变战前的措辞，这些反应就能被重新包装进我们如今的小报和低俗电视节目中，仿佛这场悲剧就发生在昨天。