The statement discusses the question of adopting a 'guilty but mentally ill' verdict in the law either to supplement or replace the traditional insanity defense, modification of legal standards now in use concerning the insanity defense, whether the burden of proof should always rest with the prosecution in insanity cases, and whether psychiatric testimony should be limited to statements of mental condition. It recommends that special legislation be designed for those persons charged with violent offenses who have been found 'not guilty by reason of insanity,' that confinement and release decisions should be made by a board including psychiatrists and other professionals representing the criminal justice system (similar to a parole board), and that release should be conditional upon having a treatment supervision plan in place with the necessary resources available to implement it. The board having jurisdiction over released insanity acquitees should have clear authority to reconfine. A total of 20 references are listed.