James Holmes will probably claim insanity to spare himself the death penalty, but it may be an error on his part.
You see, if he pleads insanity, he gives up his right against self-incrimination, as well as attorney-client privilege. His examiners can ask him anything. And, if they decide he is fit to stand trial, the prosecution can use the Batman shooter's answers against him in court.
This is an obviously unjust law, which clearly favors the prosecution, but there's nothing the accused Dark Knight gunman can do about it.
If this fellow is guilty, he deserves to suffer. But a criminal suspect is supposed to be innocent until proven otherwise in America. If Holmes is forced to answer every question from the state-appointed psychiatrists, it undoubtedly gives the prosecutors an edge.
In addition, Holmes's attorneys will be forced to fork over many of their private communications. Is this fair, or should this law be modified? James Holmes has already been convicted in the court of public opinion, but he should be allowed to plan his real defense on a level playing field.