The case examined is that of Robert Torsney, who was found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) after shooting a juvenile while on duty as a New York City police officer. The case brings into bold relief the differences between psychiatric findings and their judicial interpretations. It is proposed that immediately after a finding of NGRI a hearing be held to determine the presence or absence of mental illness. If it is shown that the presumption of continuing insanity can be rebutted and that the person no longer suffers from mental disease or defect, he/she should immediately be freed from custody. If the finding is that he/she is mentally ill but not dangerous within the definition of civil statute, then a treatment program should be devised and implemented according to the patient's needs. Where the person is found to be both mentally ill and dangerous, the type of offense with which he/she was charged should be considered. If the offense was nonviolent, the patient should be hospitalized on a voluntary or involuntary basis in an appropriate facility. If the offense was violent, the person should be involuntarily hospitalized under special court order, with release possible only under the stringent provisions outlined. Before release of the latter type of patient, a mandatory medical review should be conducted by three independent psychiatrists certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and selected on a rotating basis from a panel of volunteers maintained by the local district branch of the American Psychiatric Association. In no case should release be dependent on court action in an adversarial structure. Fifty-eight footnotes are listed.