● Encoding○ gathering ○ entails gathering information and placing it in a form that deserve to be hosted in memory,● Storage○ holding○ describes holding the encoded indevelopment in the brain over time-The maintenance of indevelopment over time within the brain● Retrieval○ accessing○ refers to accessing and also pulling out the stored indevelopment at a later on timeErrors in memory can occur at each stage of the process. -First, information can not be well encoded.-Second, tright here are imperfections in the procedure of storage.-Finally, also if the memory map is perfectly preserved in the brain, distortion deserve to happen in the time of the process of retrieval.Our memory trace—the biochemical representation of our endure in the brain—shows up to deteriorate via time. Not only do we tfinish to forgain as time passes, but our memories become even more breakable to revision and corruptionIn amount, as soon as we encode an event, we select some aspects and also overlook others. The images and also sounds we save might degeneration over time, and also the procedure of retrieval has some rebuilding and construction.

You are watching: It is especially important to record the _____ with the child because _____.

Retrieval inhibition occurs as soon as an individual:
selectively recalls some elements of a situation while the recevery one of other elements is suppressed.
● Recall● Recognition
Recall○ Memories are accessed in conditions where tbelow is no certain memory cue○ Open ended questionRecognition○ Is this confront acquainted to me? Do I recognize it○ Easier than recall tasks○ Multiple alternative question
The legal device has a few time-honored approaches for revealing truth. These techniques incorporate (3)
voir dire
(the questioning of potential jurors in the time of jury selection), cross-examination, and jury consideration. But these methods are not terribly reliable tools for exposing mistaken identifications 1) Voir dire is intended to reveal potentially biased jurors so that attorneys can dismiss out on them. But tright here is no collection of concerns that will certainly reveal whether potential jurors will certainly watch eyewitness testimony through proper skepticism. 2) Even cross-examination, an extremely advantageous tool for bringing out weakness and deceptions in testimony, is quite limited as a means of exposing mistaken eyewitness identifications. It is difficult to expose mistaken eyewitnesses as liars because they are not lying: They sincerely believe what they are saying, however they are wrong. 3) A last safeguard, jury deliberation, locations fact-finding in the hands of a group of citizens. Unfortunately, research study mirrors that jurors area undue confidence in the reliability of eyewitnesses, place as well a lot weight on eyewitness confidence, and also are not very experienced at separating in between specific and also inprecise eyewitnesses
Compare and also contrast respeak to and also acknowledgment.
Why is memory thought about to be a "reconstructive" process?
○ Errors in encoding, storage, and retrieval of information deserve to occur○ Memory traces deterioprice over time ○ Retrieval of information involves rebuilding ■ Ur memory mechanism is choose a wikopedia page fairly than a video recording. When it concerns ur memory, u can develop memories yet other ppl have the right to likewise mess through ur brain and also develop memories for u also..
Even though the Supreme Court _____ the Mankid framework, a number of claims proceed to _____ criteria established in Manchild.
Even though the Supreme Court refused to amend
the Manchild framework, several claims continue to to retake into consideration the outdated criteria establiburned in Manboy.
Define Mankid Criteria and list 5 points that should be taken into consideration while using the Mankid Criteria.
Manson criteria: provided to evaluate accuracy of eyewitness testimony■ 1. Opportunity■ 2. Accuracy of description■ 3. Level of attention■ 4. Degree of certainty—incontinuous through research findings■ 5. Time in between witnesses and identification○ difficult to apply Manboy Criteria with certainty Problems with these?■ Have not been updated for about 40 years... through science mirroring exactly how these are not great indicators■ Analyzing.. a witness that had actually a pair secs is not as reputable as a witness who had an hour through the perpetrator. They frequently overestimate how long and also likewise simply bc they had the opportunity doesn"t mean they were encoding (choose in a case where they were stressed)■ Witness descriptions perform not match really well.. its tough to verbalize descriptions of people■ Level of attention- its tough to report how much u were paying attention ■ Weak correlation with certainty and accuracy
The Manson criteria, emphasized by courts, consist of 5 factors to be taken right into account as soon as evaluating eyewitness identification accuracy. The adhering to factor was clearly disprcooktop by research:
When the eyewitness is a son, it is most likely that the accuracy of indevelopment they have the right to carry out is _____ that gave by an adult.
To test the memory of the witness? To watch if the suspect is the criminal? Single-suspect model: One suspect embedded amongst numerous fillers-fillers=recognized innocentTarget current vs Target absent
Compelling evidence in court-"Aside from a cigarette smoking pistol, nopoint carries as a lot weight with a jury as the testimony of an actual witness"Very persuasive to a jury
○ Legal devices attempts to expose eye witness bias■ Determining witness capability to observe■ Voir dire■ Cross examination■ Jury deliberation
"own race bias"-even more tough for ppl to identify encounters of world exterior of their racial group-result is not large (misidentification 1.5 times even more likely) however is continuous across races & ages
Perry v. New Hampshore (2012) (UNITED STATE Supreme Court)--worry of eyewitness proof resaw but Manson criteria not updated--Fallibility of eyewitness identifications noted State v Henderson (2011) (NJ Supreme Court) --Manchild dominance does not carry out sufficient reliability meacertain, does not deter, and overclaims jury"s capacity to evaluate eyewitness testimony State v Lawnboy (2012) (OR Supreme Court)--Prosecution should prove identification was based on permissible basis; duty for eyewitness testimony established
○ Arousing events = vivid yet not necessarily precise memories○ High stress and anxiety impairs memory and also reduces correct IDs○ Weapon emphasis is a well establiburned finding○ Stress concentrates attention yet if the perpetrator has a weapon ■ Attention directed away from the face■ Highly emotional/stressful event
the person erroneously established is someone checked out near the scene of the crime or someone seen as component of the identification procedure. -A confront that is acquainted from one conmessage is transferred to the scene of a crime
Preexisting expectations ■ Our prior knowledge/beliefs/experiences might influence memory■ Beliefs about sequence of actions in an occasion ("scripts" - doctor visit, financial institution robbery)■ Facilitate info handling yet...-We may count on scripts to "fill gaps" in our memory (sometimes incorrectly)
○ Confidence likely to boost overtime ○ Article identification (biased) feedback- distorts the memory of eyewitnesses■ "we assumed this can be the one"The resource of the feedago does not have to be the investigating police officer. In situations where even more than one perchild witnesses a crime, feedago from a confident co-eyewitness is likely to raise the confidence of the various other eyewitness
1. blind lineups2. bias-reducing instructions3. unbiased lineup4. confidence ratings5. video recording 6. sequential lineups7. experienced testimony
○ Strengthens post-identification feedago effectThe postidentification rise in confidence can be partially described by the theory of cognitive dissonance.Dissonance concept predicts that when you commit yourself to a particular course of activity, you will end up being encouraged to justify that course of action. In the situation of eyewitness identification, once you have established someone as the criminal, that activity will be dissonant (inconsistent) via the expertise that you were unparticular around your identification. That inconsistency will certainly be uncomfortable. It is incredibly difficult to admit that you figured out the wrong perkid, so the the majority of expedient indicates of reducing dissonance will be to boost your level of certainty. Once you have committed yourself to a details identification, you come to be significantly certain that you picked out the ideal perkid.
Why does cross-race effect occur?■ Encode "various other race" faces even more superficially ((not thoaround or deeply.))■ Better "rules" for making distinctions among "own race" faces■ More "interracial contact" is associated through better performance■ Not straight influenced by racial attitudes
1. In high anxiety instances, carry out human being develop accurate memories ? If not, explain why their memories are not accurate.
● Estimator Variables○ Outside the manage of the legal systemThe justice mechanism cannot regulate that witnesses a crime, just how very closely that person observes the crime, or whether the race of the victim is different from the race of the criminal.● System Variables○ Under the control of the legal systemThe justice device can manage just how a witness is wondered about and also just how lineups are built. Modifications in the form and order of concerns asked by police deserve to and also need to be made if such transforms deserve to enhance the accuracy of identification.
● Blind Lineup Administrator○ Human administering the lineup does not know that the suspect is ○ Reduces unintentional communication/cues○ Racount followedThe first ascendancy is that, "the person that conducts the lineup or photo spcheck out have to not be conscious of which member of the lineup or photo spreview is the suspect"
Lineups and also photo spreads need to be constructed so that the actual suspect does not stand out from the fillers—the alternate suspects in the lineup or photo spreview (fillers are likewise referred to as "foils" or "distractors"). That is, every one of the people in the photos or in the lineup need to resemble each other, and also all need to match the witness"s verbal summary of the offender. Nothing around the procedure have to attract extra attention to the actual suspect. This necessity may seem noticeable, however in many type of cases, lineups have actually been rigged to encourage an eyewitness to pick the suspect that police believed to be guilty. A meta-evaluation of 17 researches discovered that biased lineups (those via fillers that perform not very closely resemble the actual culprit) caused significantly higher rates of innocent suspect identificationsTo test whether a lineup is biased, a "mock witness" procedure have the right to be used. Mock witnesses are civilization who did not watch the crime. Each mock witness is offered the eyewitness"s verbal summary of the culprit. For a six-person lineup, if more than 2 out of 12 mock witnesses can pick out the suspect, it is more than likely not an unbiased lineup. If, for example, 5 out of 12 mock witnesses recognize the suspect, it indicates that identification is not an outcome of true acknowledgment, but of mere similarity to the verbal description
Sequential lineups○ Pics are presented individually ○ Absolute judgmentsSimultaneous lineups ○ Pics are shown all at the very same time○ Relative judgments ○ traditional method of showing a lineup
a. Gary suggested to focus on these variables but it underworths estimator variables.b. estimator ex: the amount of time the witness had throughout the crime to encode the perpetrators challenge.c. Estimated bc we cant manipulate them or adjust them in the legal systemd. We deserve to manipulate it in the lab but in the actual human being u cant execute anypoint abt it e. System variable ex: the biasness of a line up. Different procedures for ministering a lineup (Sequential vs simultaneous lineup).
"The actual perpetrator may not be here"-Removes the presumption that the witness is obliged to select from the available options-Forces witnesses to rely on very own memory-Removes some of the press to determine someone
Why is it more fruitful to research device variables via regards to policy change?
Techniques For Refreshing The Memories of Witnesses
● Hypnosis● Hypnotic hypermnesia
○ People normally recall more information when hypnotized ○ Does not increase the recall of exact info○ Relaxed concentrated state, even more receptive to suggestion○ Courts skeptical-- restrictions-relive the memory.. the concept is that they have the right to press pause/zoom in... yet we perform not document memories favor that○ incredibly useful in certain locations favor clinical psychology choose helping human being cope with ptsd, or to try to quit smoking.. nothing wrong via it in a clinical sense. However before, it"s a large difficulty to gain at memories.Once hypnotized, eyewitnesses are normally instructed to "rewitness" the event as if they are watching a documentary of the crime on television. They could be asked to "zoom in" on crucial details (e.g., a getaway auto, or license plate, or face) or to "replay" important components of the event. People generally recontact even more information as soon as they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized. This phenomenon is called hypnotic hypermnesia
(the opposite of amnesia). But even more information is not necessarily better indevelopment. The trouble is that memories refreshed with hypnosis may contain a huge dose of fantasy and imagiaboriginal elaboration. A fragmented eyewitness memory may come to be fuller and more vivid throughout hypnosis, not bereason the true memory has actually been restored, but because gaps in memory have actually been filled in via plausible but fictional details. Undoubtedly, research study reflects that hypnosis does not increase the recevery one of accurate indevelopment. A last trouble is that when an occasion is vividly imagined under hypnosis, a witness may end up being confident that the memory is true (a phenomenon known as "memory hardening").
At lineup: "Oh, my god... I dont understand... its among those 2...yet i dont recognize... oh, man... the male a little bit taller than #2?"At trial: "tright here was no possibly around it... i was absolutely positive"Obtain confidence statement at time of identification-immediate-before any post-identifications feedback
-Record identification procedures-Creates a lasting, objective document of the ID process-Record of the lineup itself, instructions given, size of the procedure, post-ID feedback
Psychologists summarize study on eyewitness testimonyJudges show some reluctance to admit such testimony Sensitizes jurors to the prominence of lineup actions and the lack of confidence/accuracy relationship
Invites criticism from defense expertsForces Prosecutor to safeguard actions that are not thought about "ideal practice"Invites motions to suppress the ID evidenceGives jurors one more explacountry for the ID possibly leading to acquittal
○ relive the memory.. the principle is that they have the right to press pause/zoom in... yet we carry out not document memories like that○ People typically respeak to even more details as soon as hypnotized ○ Does not rise the recevery one of specific info○ Relaxed concentrated state, more receptive to suggestion○ Courts skeptical-- restrictions
—requires a subtle step-by-action procedure designed to relax the witness and also mentally reinstate the conmessage surrounding the crime. The goal is to improve the witness"s retrieval of specific information while preventing the boosted suggestibility of hypnosis.○ Refreshing memories of eyewitnesses○ Based on research/theory from cognitive psych○ Built rapport, empower the witness, and also use mnemonics○ "cognitive interview" mnemonics■ conmessage resintatement■ report all ■ adjust perspective■ adjust order
it mentally reinsays the conmessage bordering the crime. Several determinants affect eyewitness testimony accuracy (estimator and mechanism variables)Empirically-based recreates are accessible, and also significantly accepted/mandated by law
Since decisions around insanity require judgments about the psychological functioning of a defendant, clinical psychologists
—those that study and also treat assorted forms of mental dysattribute and also psychological illness—are often vital to the legal process in such situations. But when clinical psychologists are called upon to evaluate insanity, they must force their emotional diagnoses to fit into the specific categories provided by the legislation.
o Like CST, it is a LEGAL concept- you will certainly not discover it in the DSM, it is not a diagnosis...o Unfavor CST, insanity refers to state of mind AT THE TIME OF THE CRIMEo Mental disease might not intend insanityUnchoose competence, which pertains to the defendant"s state of mind at the time of the trial, the idea of insanity describes the criminal"s state of mind at the time the crime was committed. Insanity needs that, due to a psychological illness, a defendant lacks moral responsibility and culpability for their crime, and therefore need to not be punimelted. The emotional experienced must look into the past to recognize the defendant"s mental state at the moment of the crime.
Andrea Yates unexpectedly obtained a 2nd trial. During the initially trial, among the prosecution"s professional witnesses, Dr. Park Dietz (and also the prosecutors themselves adhering to his testimony), had actually suggested that the facts of the Yates situation bore a startling resemblance to an episode of the TV display, Law & Order. In that episode, a mommy drowned her kid in the bathtub and feigned mental condition to escape punishment. It was revealed at trial that Yates was a regular watcher of the present. As it turned out, Dr. Dietz had actually a faulty memory of the show—for which he was a constant consultant—because no such episode existed. Due to the fact that of Dr. Dietz"s faulty testimony and the feasible result it might have had on the jury, a new trial was ordered.Throughout the second trial, the exact same professionals testified for the defense and prosecution, without any type of reference to the Law & Order episode. This time, a jury of 6 men and also six woguys deliberated for 13 hours over the course of 3 days prior to eventually finding Yates not guilty by reason of insanity. Yates was subsequently moved to a secure mental wellness facility where she will reprimary till she is understood no longer a danger to herself or others.
o Built on principle that people who commit crimes without complete awareness should not be hosted fully accountable for their actions
o Suggests punishment
must be proportionate to harm committedo An eye for an eyeo Revenge type of perspectiveYet, retribution calls for that the individual that committed the crime worked out complimentary will and understood what he or she was doing. If the offender did not, then the offender is not morally responsible for his or her actions and must not be punimelted. For instance, when a 6-year-old finds his father"s gun and shoots and also kills a playmate, we identify that he could not have actually fully understood the consequences of his actions. Similarly, an insane individual that did not exercise cost-free will certainly in picking to perpetrate a crime is likewise not legitimately punishable for retributive factors.
o Built on the principle that punishment should be offered to learn aftermath of crimes
♣ Specific deterrence - personn* learns crime does not pay♣ General deterrence - societyy* learns crime doesn"t pay
The idea that individuals with concerns relating to impaired cognitive understanding have to not be organized culpable was used as early as the Roman Empire. Roman regulation classified those people to be non compos mentis, or:
a) psychosis and also tension disorders. b) psychosis and intellectual discapacity. c) intellectual discapability and neuroses. d) mood disorders and also gender confusion disorder.
When determining insanity, the courts depend on:
a) defense attorneys. b) clinical psychologists. c) professional testimony. d) experienced witnesses.
• Mens rea• Actus reus
As beforehand as the Romale Empire, the regulation dictated that human being discovered to be non compos mentis—without mastery of mind—must not be organized blameworthy for their crimes. The modern form of "mastery of mind" is mens rea, or the "guilty mind" that should acagency wrongful habits. To be found guilty, it is not enough to commit a criminal act (the actus reus); one likewise must possess a "guilty mind"—an awareness of the wrongfulness of the criminal conduct.
Romale empire-human being without mastery of mind have to not be punimelted for crime-contemporary develop is mens rea or guilty mind14th-16th Century England-religiously inspired good from evil test if the perboy didnt understand great from evil then they shouldnt be puniburned for that crime-ethical failing1724 Englando Rev v. Arnold o Cognitive failing wild beastern test- inability to cognitively understand what he was doing was wrongo "totally deprived of his expertise and memory, and doth not understand what he is doing, no even more than a brute or a wild beast"tried to assassin a nobel and also ended up shooting someone else.. jury discovered him not guilty bc of the cognitive failing. Queen Victoria was incredibly upcollection and told them they have to produce a much better way to recognize insanity or else ur opening the door for ppl to perform crimes and claim insanity
The Insanity Defense Redevelop Act (IDRA) of 1984 got rid of the _____ from the meaning of insanity.
1. Provide an instance of a type of punishment that might serve as general deterrence yet not certain deterrence.
Three Important Cases and also Their Consequences
The M"Naghten Case (1843)Later added to M"Naghten Case (1950s)
• Not guilty by reason of insanity
y* (NGRI)• "at the time of committing an act, the party laboring under such a defect of factor so as not to recognize the nature and also high quality of the act he was doing, OR if he did understand it, that he did not recognize what he was doing was wrong"• described as a cognitive test of insanityo Does the defendant understand also what he or she is doing? ORo Does the defendant recognize what he or she is doing is wrong?Later added to M"Naghten Case (1950s)• Cognition is just PART of insanity• Some states later included the term "Irresistible impulse"o To take into account the defendant"s volitional capacity- incapacity to manage his or her behavior • This addition had a brief life—why ?o "policemale at the elbow test"o would they still have actually committed the crime if the police officer present? That would certainly present proof u obviously cannot manage ur habits.
• denied the ideal to plead insanity by the trial judge despite psychological illness• conviction overturned and also judge ordered a new trial utilizing a brand-new typical of insanity• Durham standard
(or "product test""*)o "an accoffered is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental condition or defect"Did it transition the balance also far? The courts assumed so...o the courts believed that this currently would certainly relocate over to the principle that jurors would identify if someone was guilty or not ssuggest based upon expert testimony... it renders it wide open and also spreads the shift way as well much and provides it also easy for ppl to obtain ameans via crimesDaniel M"Naghten (periodically spelled "McNaughton") was tormented by paranoid delusions. He thought that people in the government were plotting to kill him. In 1843, he collection out to kill the prime minister of England (Robert Peel), that he thought was part of a conspiracy against him. By mistake, he swarm and killed the prime minister"s secretary. At trial, nine clinical professionals testified that M"Naghten was insane, and also the jury found him not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI), even though they were told that he would be sent out to a psychiatric hospital rather of prikid. He invested the remainder of his life in Broadmoor insane asylum. Queen Victoria was incensed by the sentence offered in the M"Naghten case. She demanded that the House of Lords pass new regulations to safeguard the public from "the wrath of madmen that can now kill through impunity" (Eule, 1978). The public was similarly displeased. Fifteen high court judges were directed to create a new conventional of legal insanity.The new ruleM"Naghten rule—consisted of three components:ts:* (1) a presumption that defendants are sane and responsible for their crime; (2) a necessity that, at the minute of the crime, the accused need to have actually been laboring "under a defect of reason" or "from illness of the mind"; AND(3) a requirement that the defendant "did not understand the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not recognize what he was doing was wrong." Therefore, for a defendant to be uncovered NGRI under the M"Naghten rule, the defendant had to prove that he suffered from a mental illness that influenced his ability to understand also what he was doing and/or his capability to understand that what he was doing was wrong. -The M"Naghten ascendancy was ultimately imported from English law into American legislation. It is occasionally referred to as a cognitive test of insanity because it emphasizes discovering and knowledge whether one"s actions are right or wrong. -But, as many kind of doubters listed in the years complying with the M"Naghten ascendancy, cognition is just part of "insanity" and also possibly not even the the majority of essential component. Some claims added the term irresistible impulse to their definitions of insanity based upon the defendant"s volitional capacity, or incapability to manage his or her habits. Under this revised dominance, a defendant could be acquitted if "his reasoning powers were so much dethroned by his diseased mental condition as to deprive him of willpower to stand up to the insane impulse to perpetrate the deed, though discovering it to be wrong" (Smith v. United States, 1954). -A mental disorder could create an uncontrollable impulse to commit the offense, also if the defendant remained able to understand the nature of the offense and its wrongfulness. The "volitional" amendment to the interpretation of insanity, yet, had actually a brief life. The trouble was that it was too hard to tell when an impulse was irresistible. That is, just how could a jury decide whether the defendant can not stand up to the impulse or sindicate did not stand up to the impulse? As the American
o "a perchild is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the moment of such conduct, as an outcome of mental disease or defect, he lacks comprehensive capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct OR to condevelop his conduct to the requirements of the law"♣ M"Naughten choose cognitive prong♣ Irresistible impulse—choose volitional prongo Quite successful - adopted in 26 states and also a modified version by federal courts
• the a lot of renowned of these cases• they use the ALI standard
• John Hinckley, troubled, relocated to Hollylumber to make it big... he watched taxi driver and also came to be obsessed via Jody Foser, would certainly go to her college and attempt to talk to her all the moment, she gets upcollection... inevitably he came to be so obsessed that he tried to win her love by what taxi driver did, tried to assassinate Ronald reagan..• This situation brought about a huge overhaul of the justice system as soon as it pertains to the insanity defense• He was discovered not guilty by reason of insanity.. most likely bc they used the ALI conventional • This typical put the impident on the prosecution to prove that Hinckley was sane at the time of the crime
explores the intersection of neuroscience and also issues of culpcapability, obligation, and punishment in the regulation.Hinckley swarm and also wounded four human being, consisting of the president. A videotape of the shootings was played and replayed on nationwide tv just after the assassination attempt and throughout Hinckley"s 1982 trial. In court, four psychological expertstestified that Hinckley endured from major psychological disturbance, many likely paranoid schizophrenia. One of these psychiatric experts even introduced one of the initially examples of neurolaw skilled testimony—testimony intending to display a link in between brain abnormalities and an individual"s illegal actions.The jury found Hinckley "not guilty by factor of insanity."
For many kind of Americans, the NGRI verdict in the Hinckley case seemed to epitomize all that was wrong with the insanity defense: Here was an obviously guilty (albeit disturbed) male whose crime was recorded on videotape. He had actually the presence of mind to stalk the president, purchase a handgun, and plan the murder attempt.Yet Hinckley had the ability to avoid being organized accountable for his actions bereason his well-off paleas bought him the solutions of a high-priced lawyer and also several mental professionals to testify on his behalf. At least, that appears to be exactly how the public saw it at the moment. Of course, the genuine story was a bit more complicated. Even the prosecution experts had testified that Hinckley was plagued by a mental disorder of some type. The a lot of important element in Hinckley"s acquittal
was probably the *burden of proof* in the case. Instead of requiring the defense to prove that the defendant was insane at the moment of the crime, the burden of proofburden of proofable to stop being organized accountable for his actions because his wealthy parental fees bought him the services of a high-priced lawyer and several mental specialists to testify on his behalf. At leastern, that seems to be exactly how the public experienced it at the moment. Of course, the genuine story was a bit even more facility. Even the prosecution experts had actually testified that Hinckley was plagued by a psychological disorder of some kind. The *a lot of essential aspect in Hinckley"s acquittal* was more than likely the *burden of proof* in the instance. Instead of requiring the defense to prove that the defendant was insane at the moment of the crime, the *burden of proof* was placed on the prosecution to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the defendant was sane.

See more: Find The X-Component Of The Total Force Exerted On The Third Charge By The Other Two.

This shift in the burden of proof most likely had even more to execute through the NGRI verdict than the skill of Hinckley"s lawyers or experts
Jessica suffered from a psychotic break and also stabbed and eliminated her mom through a kitchen knife while her mom was preparing dinner. After the murder, Jessica made sure to dispose of all proof of the crime. Under the M"Naghen dominion, is her plea of not guilty by factor of insanity valid? Exordinary your reasoning.