Analysis: Reform of the insanity law has been promised since 1991, writes Carol Coulter
The decision of the jury in the Central Criminal Court to find David Brennan guilty of the murder of his baby nephew, but insane, is unlikely to be controversial. His mother's concerns for his mental health were clearly sufficient evidence for the jury.
Under the existing law, there are only two options - guilty, implying full knowledge of the implications of the act committeed, or insane, and therefore not guilty because of an incapacity to understand the meaning of the crime.
If the latter verdict is brought in, the person is detained "during the Government's pleasure", which in practice means indefinitely. However, as a legally innocent person he can seek his release on the grounds that he has regained his sanity.
This weakness in the law has led to dubious decisions in the past, and to calls for reform of the law, which first arose in 1978.
The case that drew attention to the weakness in the law was that of John Gallagher, found guilty of the murder of his former girl-friend, Ms Anne Gillespie, and her mother in 1988, but found to be insane, although he had exhibited few symptoms of mental illness prior to the murder.
He was sent to the Central Mental Hospital in Dundrum, from which he soon initiated a legal campaign to secure his release. He claimed he had recovered his sanity and should no longer be detained.
The Supreme Court ruled that this was a matter for the Government, which refused to release him, but in 1999 he absconded and was last heard of in England.
There is no doubt that his case was in the collective mind of juries in the Brendan O'Donnell and Patrick Granaghan cases, two murder cases which happened shortly after the Gallagher one, and where the perpetrators had shown more symptoms of insanity than had John Gallagher.
But no jury wanted to take the risk of allowing the perpetrators seek release on the grounds of recovered sanity, and these men were convicted of murder, implying full awareness of their actions.
The Gallagher case prompted calls for reform of the law, and the dust was shaken off a 1978 report, by an interdepartmental committee chaired by Mr Justice Henchy, on the treatment of persons suffering from mental disorders who appear before the courts.
The existing law has its roots in the 1883 Trial of Lunatics Act, and our knowledge of psychiatry has changed a lot since then, allowing for nuances in our evaluation of people's mental states.
A draft Bill was prepared, but nothing came of it.
In February 1998 a spokesman for the present Minister, Mr O'Donoghue, told The Irish Times that the heads of a new Bill would be brought to Cabinet before the Dáil's summer recess. This did not happen.
Yesterday a spokesman for the Department said that the new Bill has been approved for drafting by the Government and was with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel.