Abstract
This article examines the insanity defence in South Africa and New Zealand through the lens of the widely publicised case of R v Dickason. In September 2021, Mrs Lauren Dickason killed her three daughters in Christchurch, New Zealand, and raised a plea of insanity, which was rejected, leading to her conviction for murder. Against this factual backdrop, the article explores the concept of mental illness from both a clinical and legal perspective, tracing its definitions, diagnostic classifications, and relevance for criminal responsibility. The discussion highlights similarities and differences in the development and application of the insanity defence in the two jurisdictions, with reference to leading statutory provisions and case law. By situating the Dickason case within these frameworks, the article illustrates the challenges courts face in reconciling psychiatric evidence with legal standards of culpability and responsibility and reflects on the limits of criminal law in addressing offences committed under conditions of severe mental illness.