Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1907-02-17
THE INSANITY FEATURE
OF THE THAW CASE
An Interesting Review Of the Plea by a
Noted Writer on Criminal Law.

From the opening address OF the de-
fendanrs counsel in the trial Of Harry
X. Thaw for the killing of Stanford
White and the examination Of Witness
IS it appears that the only real defense
viii be insanity. and that the form of
insanity relied upon will be insane de-
lusiOn-that is. an insanse delusion that
White had ruined the defendants wife.
OF an insane delusion that it was nee
essary for the defendant to kill White
in self defense or in defense Of his Wife,
or an insane delUsion that the homi-
eide was an act Of Providence. and the
defendant the agent Of Providence in
committing il. There is also some in
timsJieH that questions as To irressist-
Idle impulse and emotional insanity
may arise In view of this outlining
Of Jfle defense. it Will be Of interest to
our readers TO publish the following
statement % the law procured from
Mr.. William l. Clark. the author Of a
number uf works on criminal law. and
reviewing editor Of the Cyclopedia Of
Law and Procedure. known as "Cyc."
He'says:
ITO say that a man is guilty Of no
crime in New York if he kills another
while insane. although true as a gem
cral proposition. is too indefinite II
IS necessary to go further and ascer-
tain what is meant by the term insan-
ity, for it admits Of degrees and ap-
pears in various phases: and il is nee
,ssary TO go further still and ascertain
what Is meant by the term under the
laws OF New York. for the law of the
state on insanity as a defense differs
from The law in some Of the other
THE TEST OF INSANITY IN NEW
YORK
Under the Penal Code Of New York
sections 20 and 2D. as under the law
ia all other states Q2 eye 166: p eye
it' = man is not responsible for a
homicide. committed while insane. if the
insanity was such that he did not know
the nature and quality Of his act or
did not know that it was wrong. on
she Other hand. to exempt from respou-
sil,iiii- in New York. although il is
otherwise in Alabama. New Hampshire
ana some Of the other states (l2 Cvc
I6g. y Cyc 500. the insanity must be
such ss 40 have this effect. In this
state section 20 Of the Penal Code de-
claFes that IAN act done by a person
who is an idiot. embicile lunatic OF in
sane. is not a crime" But section 7 ex-
IresSlv provides that "a person is not
excused from criminal liability as an
idiot. imbeCile. lUnatic. or insane per-
son. except upon proof that at the time
- committing the alleged criminal act
lc was laboring under such a defect of
reason as either. Cd not TO know the
nature and quality Of the act he is do
ing or % not 10 know that the act
was wrong" and section % provides
that "a morbid propensity to commit
prohibited acts. existing in the mind Of
% person who is not shown to have been |
Incapable Of knowing the wrongfulness
~ such acts. forms no defense TO a I
prosecution therefor"
These provisions prescribe the only |
test Df insanity as a defense in Grim |
iual cases known to the law OF New !
York and therefore. although a man
may be TO some extent insane when he F.
Kills another and although medical ex-
Ierts may agree in SO testifying he is
nevertheless criminally responsible il. /
Notwithstanding his defective or per-
vartcd mental condition. he knew the
nature and quality OF his act and knew
that il. was wrong People V Crist
16S y. Y. %: People Y. Silvcrman Isl
y. Y. 235. Whether ne was. insane to
such an extent is a question for the
jury. The defense must introduce some
evidence Of insanity. but if does. then
the jury. in order 10 convict. must be
CONVINCED of his sanity beyond a rea-
souaLle doubt
INSANE DELCSIONS
On order that insanity may be sue
cessfully set up as n defense in pros
ecutfon for homicide, it is not ncces-