Should Juries be Informed of the Consequences of the Insanity Verdict?

Abstract

When a criminal defendant is acquitted by reason of insanity, he is either automatically committed to a sanatorium, or subjected to further proceedings to determine whether he is dangerous to himself or to society and therefore should be committed. If the jurors in the criminal trial are unaware of these safeguards against releasing dangerous persons, they may be inclined to return a guilty verdict. A number of factors must be evaluated to determine whether, in a particular case, the dangers outweigh the benefits of telling jurors about postverdict commitment procedures. Therefore, trial judges must be free to decide on a case-by-case basis exactly how much to tell jurors about what happens to defendants acquitted by reason of insanity.