finding this finding however was against manifestly the evidence because the defense met its burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that mario feliciano was insane at the time of the incidents for what she was later ch that margarito was a sixty year old homeless woman who was just blocks away from here on the ground her in her pajamas and sweatshirt pulled up over her head exposing having her breasts expose shows is that these witnesses were describing a woman who did not appreciate the criminality of her conduct also there was the testimony of her extensive mental health history which also included have understood the criminality is what you're saying but didn't she put her shirt back on when the officer started coming towards her ball brain i mean isn't that evidence that perhaps she she did understand state she was on can't be able to care for her so confused incoherent showed illogical thinking and couldn't even comprehend the simple questions that were being asked of her by the examiner and three months later experts continue to know  and seeing what it did today it would have found their margarita was insane but he was concerned there at the pros concerned that there was no testimony about her mental capacity at the time and nobody extrapolated back  clipboard to make an assessment to the defendant right there that's not going to happen which is why we allow witnesses to talk about what they observe the defendant behavior was like at the time we usually don't use an expert those bases when you're going with the lead witnesses to impaired that can you have a conversation with her to figure out what her it can get any information out of her to figure out what was going on with her on that day and so the expert said i can't even make that kind of opinion because i can standard is clear and convincing evidence i think you have clear convincing evidence that was highly probable that margarito us condition in nineteen or i'm sorry two thousand and thirteen was the same as it was in two thousand and believe court was looking for that magic piece of evidence and not making the extrapolations necessary that the court as a trier of fact was responsible making with that evidence presented to it and as far as the perp being concerned that there the evidence that is whether it was arbitrary unreasonable or based on or not these time the evidence presented we will argue that it was not against manifest weight of the evidence but before getting into the proposed  change and as counsel pointed out it is a clear and convincing requirement now civil defendant in order to prevail under fact that defendant has had a long history of mental illness does not show that she was insane on the day that she committed the conduct in question and it worked to prove legal insanity defendant would have to show by enough in this case the fact that jonathan don't go said that she was not ok and i think that would have been apparent to anybody somebody who is burying her breasts and downtown all can it clearly that a person does not ok now whether or not it rises to the level of insanity is a different question that counsel brought up the fact that the cell will there be or if ever i dr president to conduct a psychiatric evaluation when the conduct a curse but here if i recall correctly when defined it was arraigned she was released and she was allowed to go live with her boyfriend and then approximately five months later this when the first so this area it would have been fine for the trial court to have said present all of this i can extrapolate back because this is the two legal standard i believe that under different circumstances that would have been fine with us not here why why can't the trial court failure of the system not to help her examine the time that was closer to the event she's sort of a victim of circumstances here one could argue that she's a victim of circumstances but we don't have enough me from her perspective she did years three male who he says are at least two approaching her she doesn't know who they are and based on the medical testimony she can't discern certainly awkward or feeling strange when these three men approached his really disingenuous because she was on the street baring her breasts while people were taking pictures and she seemed like she was king i apologize whether or not she was ok but people observing what she was doing i think is a different question he personally visited we have this in the record about how she felt at that time now how she felt or her perception he approached and asked her are you all right she didn't become aggressive i don't know that i would try that conclusion i believe that it's more possible or more probable to stand trial in two thousand and nine so the fact that she had a long history of mental illness again under the proper medication she could have been fine and we can hypothesize as  everybody they came up to her that day it was the fact that her doll who approached her and asked her are you ok she could said yeah being me alone or something i guess she didn't she didn't answer she just looked and there is no indication about whether or not she was even aware that these until let's hear is it the sure with the timing was that she appeared in court with an interpreter so i'm not sure how much interaction with the court had with her directly during those times or whether or not the court wasn't yes she's been in custody we do know that while she's back you know i'm not certain i probably just i don't i don't know what the timing of her being an hour but again there was discussion about that she was supposed to be living with the boyfriend it wasn't even sure that there was even a boyfriend i mean again as i recall reading the record my college as i don't have exactly when she was in it now but i don't know how much communication the attorney had with her at that point to make any sort of determinations about whether or not i don't you know i have to come out and be able to work with this client and i better make my