“The Tell-Tale Heart”, By Edgar Allen Poe consists of a first-person narrative of a series of events that let to the homicide of an old man by the narrator. Despite the many references to madness in the narrative, it is clear that, by any fair legal standard, the narrator is guilty of premeditated murder, and despite his questionable mental status, is fully responsible for his actions.
According to the United States Criminal Code insanity as a defense for acts is an affirmative type of defense. (18 U. S. C.
17), This means that the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt rests, not with the prosecution, but with the defendant(18 U. S. C. 17),.The defendant must prove that his state of mind conformed to the legal definition of insanity.
(18 U. S. C. 17), That definition is that the defendant was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the act.
The facts of the case, as described by the narrator, do not support such a conclusion. (18 U. S. C. 17), The narrator made many statements that prove that, while his reasoning may have been defective, his sense of right and wrong remained intact before, during, and after the act.The narrator admits that “It [the idea of the murder] haunted me day and night”.
Poe, 382). The narrator himself boasts of the precision, thought, and preparation he put into the planning and execution of his act. He states, “You should have seen how wisely I proceeded — with what caution — with what foresight — with what dissimulation I went to work! ” (382) He describes a detailed plan that he executed over an eight-day period to ensure the success of his act. ” …every morning, when the day broke, I went boldly into the chamber, and spoke courageously to him, calling him by name in a hearty tone, and inquiring how he had passed the night.So you see he would have been a very profound old man, indeed, to suspect that every night, just at twelve, I looked in upon him while he slept. ” (383) This statement illustrates that the narrator knew that discovery of his intentions would have led to negative consequences; he knew it was wrong.
The evening he chose to commit the murder, his state of mind is still lucid by the legal definition.. His delusional account of the loudness of the victim’s beating heart prompted him to act.He states, “And now a new anxiety seized me — the sound would be heard by a neighbor! ( 385) His fear for discovery is further proof of his capacity to determine right from wrong, as he acted to avoid discovery. After the act, the narrator took extreme measures to conceal the act, further indicating that he knew it was wrong.
He “dismembered the corpse. I cut off the head and the arms and the legs. ” (386) He then concealed the pieces under the floorboards. He further made attempts, after the police had arrived, to conceal what he thought to be the heart of his victim. He “talked more fluently, and with a heightened voice.Yet the sound increased.
(386) Again, this act clearly indicates the understanding of consequences that would follow from his crime. There is certainly evidence in the narrative to indicate some level of delusion on the part of the narrator. Again, however, these indicators do not satisfy a legal standard of insanity. His motive for the crime was to “take the life of the old man, and thus rid myself of the eye forever. ” (382) No matter how irrational at its core, this statement clearly defines motive, yet another indication that the narrator was not legally insane.
The fact that the narrator waited for the old man’s eye to be open before striking (384) further shows the rational connection between the motive and the act. The narrator’s delusions after the murder, likely intensified by a feeling of guilt (which, in itself assumes a capacity to determine that the act was wrong), do not exculpate him from the crime. It is clear from the narrative that the speaker in “The Tell-Tale Heart” has mental issues with relation to the nature of reality, but he also illustrates through is own description of his actions that his mental condition does not meet the legal standard for insanity.It does, however, suggest that a mitigation of sentence may be in order, as the narrator’s assumption of facts, such as the old man’s eye being evil, were based in delusion. Nevertheless, if I were sitting on his jury, I would be compelled to find him guilty of manslaughter, at the very least, and if the rest of the Jury were so inclined, A murder conviction is not beyond the realm of possibility.
