It's not stated in the statute that she's sane if she knew that it violates the law and knew that society considers it wrong - that must be how the courts have applied the statute over time though and is probably part of the jury instructions. That is a very helpful clarification. Without it, there's more of an argument that she thought what she was doing was "right."
"In 2000, the Florida legislature changed the landscape in cases where
insanity is raised as a defense. The Florida legislature passed Senate Bill
268, creating section 775.027, Florida Statutes. The law is patterned after a
similar federal law on insanity. A copy of the session law is attached at
Appendix A.
The Senate staff analysis for Senate Bill 268 outlines the Florida
Legislatures rationale for changing the law. The analysis contains the
following quote:
The acquittal of John Hinkley on all charges stemming from his
attempt on President Reagans life, coupled with the ensuing
public focus on the insanity defense, prompted Congress to
undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the insanity defense as
it operated in the federal courts. Shannon v. United States, 512
U.S. 573, 114 S. Ct. 2419 (1994). As a result of this case,
Congress passed the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984,
(IDRA), 18 U.S.C. ss. 17, 4241-4247. The IDRA makes
insanity an affirmative defense in federal courts, to be proved
by the defendant, by clear and convincing evidence.
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/comments/2005/05-1622 Second Amended Report 3-9-06.pdf
"In November 2000, President Bill Clinton authorized the development of up to 100 pilot "mental health courts," modeled in part on an innovative Florida court that hears cases involving mentally ill defendants accused of non-violent offenses. Here's background on the legislation and its limitations, and a preview of what Congress may have in store for the current session.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crime/trial/mhcourts.html
