Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, Vol 58(1), Jan 2026, 35-44; doi:10.1037/cbs0000446
It is well established that the American public holds inaccurate perceptions and negative attitudes about legal defences that can excuse defendants from criminal responsibility on the grounds of mental disorder (i.e., the Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity defence), but no studies have examined Canadians’ understanding of the comparable Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD) defence. This study examined Canadians’ perceptions and attitudes regarding the NCRMD defence and the relationship between these perceptions, attitudes, and mock juror decision making. Jury-eligible Canadians (n = 238) were surveyed about their perceptions and attitudes regarding the NCRMD defence and acted as mock jurors for a fabricated case. The results demonstrated widespread misconceptions and negative attitudes about the NCRMD defence. Negative attitudes towards the NCRMD defence predicted a decreased likelihood of mock jurors finding a defendant NCRMD. Mock jurors were more likely to return a verdict of NCRMD in a case when the mental disorder was due to mental illness versus substance use, but even in the case of mental illness, only 60.35% of mock jurors found the accused NCRMD. The findings raise concerns about the fairness of NCRMD trials in Canada. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved)