In 1987, Kenneth Parks, a 23-year-old Canadian, drove 15 miles to the home of his mother and father-in-law. Upon arrival, he stabbed both with a kitchen knife, killing his mother-in-law and severely injuring his father-in-law. With an immediate confession from Parks, this seems like an easy case. The problem? Kenneth Parks was sleepwalking at the time of the crime.
Parks claimed he did not remember any of his actions and that there was no reasonable motive for the murder. This leaves the court to determine whether sleepwalking constitutes non-insane automatism. Automatism is the performance of actions without conscious thought or intention. In Canada, automatism works as a defense and results in absolute acquittal. Once the defendant raises automatism as a defense, the burden is on the court to show that the acts were voluntary. R v. Parks, 2 S.C.R. 871 (1992).
As in Canada, automatism is a defense in the United States. Automatism in the U.S. is more commonly referred to as the Unconsciousness Defense that occurs when the defendant was unconscious while the offense occurred. It is a complete defense to all crimes, including the strict liability offenses. State v. Hinkle, 200 W.Va. 280, 489 S.E.2d 257 (1996). There are two exceptions: felony murder and “when the crime charged can be committed recklessly or negligently and the defendant, knowing of his tendency to black out, put himself in a position where a manifestation of this tendency would be especially dangerous”. N.C.P.I. - Crim. 302.10 n. 1.
Non-insane automatism is where the automatism is caused by external factors, is not continual and is not linked to any disease of the mind. Id. Parks did not have any mental conditions and had no past experiences with sleepwalking. He had, however, been working long hours and getting little to no sleep. Ultimately, Parks was acquitted both at trial and on appeal.
Should unconsciousness negate the crime committed?
Do you believe there should have been consequences for Kenneth Parks?
No comments:
Post a Comment