Explain the difference between diminished capacity and diminished responsibility

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

"Diminished capacity" is an unfortunate term. First, it's not an affirmative defense in the sense that it excuses criminal conduct. It's a failure-of-proof defense, "a rule of evidence that allows the defense to introduce evidence to negate … specific intent" in a very narrow set of cases—mostly premeditation in first-degree murder. "It is an attempt to prove that the defendant, incapable of the requisite intent of the crime charged, is innocent of that crime but may well be guilty of a lesser one" (State v. Phipps 1994, 143)—second-degree murder instead of first-degree murder.
Second, diminished capacity isn't the same as diminished responsibility, with which it's often confused. Diminished responsibility is a defense of excuse; it's a variation on the defendant's argument, "What I did was wrong, but under the circumstances I'm not responsible.". In diminished responsibility, the defendant argues, "What I did was wrong, but under the circumstances I'm less responsible.".