I've been following the crime since it happened, but just picked up the trial. I'm leaning towards JH being insane. I've always thought that since evidence started coming out.
The question is did he know right from wrong when he carried out the shooting. Did he have the mental capacity to understand what he was about to do was wrong and against the law. I am inclined to believe he did.
However, he has spoken about this impulse to kill which grew stronger as he got older. This is what the state of Colorado State uses as their Legal Insanity law:
COLORADO The state uses a modified version of the M'Naghten Rule with the Irresistible Impulse Test. The burden of proof is on the state.
The burden falls on the state to prove JH was legally sane when he attacked the cinema. The defence don't have to do anything (although I'm sure they will) to prove otherwise.
If the defence can convince the jury that JH acted out of 'Irresistible Impulse' they might be able to avoid the death penalty.
Here is a definition of Irresistible Influence:
A test applied in a criminal prosecution to determine whether a person accused of a crime was compelled by a mental disease to commit it and therefore cannot be held criminally responsible for her or his actions.
In most jurisdictions, a person may defend criminal charges on a ground of insanity. The Insanity Defense comes in two main forms. First, a defendant may argue that because of mental disease or defect, he or she lacked the capacity to distinguish right from wrong. This is cognitive insanity.
Second, a defendant may argue that because of mental disease or defect, she or he was unable to act in conformance with the law. This is volitional insanity, and it is known as the irresistible impulse defense. Under this defense, a defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity even though she or he was capable of distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the offense.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/irresistible+impulse
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk