disorder at the time when he committed the offense. Almost all disorders that are
medically recognized, such as psychoses, neuroses, personality disorders, can
qualify under the defense. Second, it is required that the mental disorder has
substantially impaired the defendant’s capacities to be held responsible. Depending
on the legal system, cognitive, evaluative, and volitional capacities can be distin-
guished. Third, there is the question whether there may be reasons against
attributing the offense to the mental disorder, such as prior fault of getting in a
situation where the defendant lost his mind. One may think here of drug use or other
forms of intoxication leading to a psychosis.
Diminished Capacity In cases where the defendant’s capacities have been
impaired by the disorder, but not to the extent of legal irresponsibility, courts can
decide to take into account the partial impairment of the pertinent capacities as
reason for mitigating the punishment. These cases of “diminished capacity” are
much more common than the application of the complete classification of insanity.
7.8 Criminal Attempts
So far, we have mainly focused on successful or completed crimes. For instance, the
murder victim lies dead on the ground; property has been stolen, damaged, or
destroyed. However, under certain conditions, criminal law will also impose pun-
ishment for attempts to commit a crime.
Think again of the case described in the introduction. The suspect in this case wanted to kill
his rival Mr. M. but was unsuccessful in his endeavor. Leaving liability issues for the death
of the wife aside, it would seem unacceptable were Mr. M. to escape liability in this
situation simply because he failed to reach his goal.
The reasons why criminal law also imposes punishment for attempted crime can
be summarized as follows. In the first place, criminal law has clearly become more
concerned with the task of preventing crime. The task of preventing future harm
however requires that criminal sanctions are already available before the offense
has actually been committed. In the second place, the view that people who attempt
to commit a crime but fail should not escape criminal liability is corroborated if one
takes into consideration that in regard to moral culpability, there seems to be no
difference between a person who attempts to bring about the prohibited result and
fails and a person who succeeds. They have both manifested their willingness to
break the law and should therefore be punished.
Criminal Intent Generally speaking, attempts can be viewed as cases of failure. A
burglar is apprehended by the police before he can break into a house. The intended
victim, Mr. M., is unharmed by the poisonous cake of John B. All these cases of
failed criminal behavior are candidates for attempt liability. So, at a more abstract
142 J. Keiler et al.