Library Header Image
LSE Research Online LSE Library Services

Psychologising Jekyll, demonising Hyde: the strange case of criminal responsibility

Lacey, Nicola (2010) Psychologising Jekyll, demonising Hyde: the strange case of criminal responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 4 (2). pp. 109-133. ISSN 1871-9791

Full text not available from this repository.
Identification Number: 10.1007/s11572-010-9091-8


This paper puts the famous story of Jekyll and Hyde to work for a specific analytic purpose. The question of responsibility for crime, complicated by the divided subjectivity implicit in Mr. Hyde's appearance, and illuminated by Robert Louis Stevenson's grasp of contemporary psychiatric, evolutionary and medical thought as promising new technologies for effecting a distinction between criminality and innocence, is key to the interest of the story. I argue that Jekyll and Hyde serves as a powerful metaphor both for specifically late Victorian perplexities about criminality and criminal responsibility, and for more persistently troubling questions about the legitimacy of and practical basis for criminalization. A close reading of the story illustrates the complex mix of elements bearing on criminal responsibility-attribution, and—incidentally—helps to explain what is wrong with the influential argument that, by the end of the nineteenth Century, attributions of responsibility in English criminal law already rested primarily and unambiguously on factual findings about the defendant's state of mind. Far from representing the triumph of a practice of responsibility-attribution grounded in the assessment of whether the defendant's capacities were fully engaged, I argue that the terrain of mental derangement defences in late nineteenth Century England helps us to understand that longer-standing patterns of moral evaluation of character remained central to the criminal process. And precisely because `character' remained key to the institutional effort to distinguish criminality and innocence, the `terror' of Stevenson's story resides in its questioning of whether either scientific knowledge or moral evaluation of character can provide a stable basis for attributions of responsibility. In conclusion, I will also suggest that Stevenson's tale can help us to make sense of the resurgence of overtly `character-based' practices of responsibility attribution in contemporary Britain and the United States, which themselves reflect a renewed crisis of confidence in our ability to effect a `dissociation' between criminality and innocence.

Item Type: Article
Official URL:
Additional Information: © 2010 Springer
Divisions: Law
Subjects: H Social Sciences > HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology
K Law > K Law (General)
Date Deposited: 14 Apr 2011 14:14
Last Modified: 14 Feb 2024 19:36

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item