Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1907-02-04

| snail DOt IIlB vi III
pulse and II is sufficient If there is
some thought and reflection on the act.
and a choice and determination as the
result OF such mental action. People VS..
Hawkins, 100 N. Y. 40s; People VS.. Bar
beri, 14s n. Y. 256; p Ency. 726.
MANsLAUGHTER AT LEAST.
Under the supposed facts and cir
oumstances CT the killing it seems clear
that there can be no question as TO
manslaughter. At common law,
homicide is not murder. but man
slaughter only, although Intentionally
| committed, II IL is committed in the
heat of passion caused by adequate
provocation but passion, however
| great, Is not sufficient to reduce the
killing to manslaughter, If the provo
cation is not in its nature adequate in
the eye OF the law, or If there has been
time after the provocation was given
for the passion of reasonable man to
cool, whether 1t does in fact cool or
not since the safety OF the community
requires that persons shall reasonably
control their passions. And, although
there has been some tendency TO leave
the question In such cases 10 the jury,
the law has long been settled that mere
suspicion, or even actual knowledge,
on the part OF a. husband of past or
even continuing illicit relations between
his wife ana another man is not such
provocation as will reduce his killing
of the man from murder to manslaugh-
ter. 81 Cyc 751-75S. a fortiori. sus-
picion, or even knowledge. on the part
of a man that his wife is being pur-
sued or annoyed by another would not
be such provocation az TO reduce a
homicide 10 manslaughter Further
more under the present statute in
New York, a homicide cannot be
cassed as manslaughter except when
there was no design TO effect death;
| when that purpose is present the crime
is murder in one of its degrees, unless
II is excusable or Justifiable. n. Y.
Penal Code, sections 1888, 1S9, 1888; People
| vs. Beckwith, 103 n. Y, $50,
NOT EXCUsABLE.
"Nor was the homicide excusable or
justifiable either at common law or
under the New York statute, for, to be
| excusabIe, 1t must have been commit
ted by accident in doing a lawful act,
and to be justifable, il must have been
| In the lawful defense of Thaw or his
| wife. when there was reasonable
ground to apprehend design on the
| part of the person slain TO commit a
felony, or TO do some great personal
| injury etc, and when there was i'm
minent danger of such design being
accomplished N, Y. Pen, Code, sec
tions 2o3. 2o5. See 81 eye, 7e4. Sl2, SEQ
INSANITY PLEA.
With respect to the defense of in
| sanity, II Thaw was insane when he
killed White, he not only cannot be
punished. but ho was guilty of no
| crime, and this Is true although he
| may have been sane before he COM
nlitted the act and may be sane now.
IL Cyc 165; 81 eye 663. Whether or
not he was Insane is of course a cues
ton or fact which must be determined
by the jury from the evidence; but
| there are certain tests established by
law In this state, as elsewhere, for de-
termination OF the question whether, IL
ne was to some extent insane. his in
| sanity was sufficient TO EXEMPT him
from responsibility.
| In the first place it is everywhere
the settled law, in New York by express
| statutory provision, that II Thaw. al
the time he killed White, was so insane
| that he did not know the nature and
quality OF his act, or that he did not
| KNOW the act was wrong, he Is not re-
| sponslble, and must be acquitted. N. Y.
Pen. Code. sections 20, 81; IL eye, 1866;
81 Cyc, 500.
In the second place, it is equally
well settled that mere moral or emo
tional insanity. or frenzy produced by
anger, Jealousy, or other like passion
is not such insanity as will exempt
from responsibility. where the person
knew tho nature and quality of his act.
| ana mat IL was wrong; and this is
true, IT has been hold. although he
may be unable to control his passion,
| and even though some mental defect
makes him more liable to Yield to pas
sion than II he were mentally sound
| IL eye. 40; III eye. 666. Proof of such
condition. however, by excluding the
elements of the elaboration aud pre-
incubation, II the evidence shows that
| u dld so. but not otherwise, VIII reduce
the homicide to murder In the second
degree. People VS.. Barbeli $40 NJ Y.
25e 81 Cyc. 732
Perhaps there may be such n thing
as genuine insanity produced by an
ger. jealousy or revenge, and II there
IS, which Is question OF fact to be
determined from the evidence, then 1t
Ia a defense to the same extent as in
sanity produced by any other cause
put IT. must be genuine insanity as dis
tlnguished from turbulence of passion
| produced by a desire for revenge
tPeople VS.. Foy, t3s N. Y, 66G. $3.50, and
it must, as is expressly required by sec
| ton 81 OF the penal code, have been
such as to render the accused incapable
or knowing the nature and quality OF
his act or OF knowing that II Was
wrong The heat OF passion and feel
ing produced by motives of anger, hat
red, or revenge is not insanity and
affords no gronud OF exemption from
rssp9nsibility People VS.. Foy. 1888
| ~, \. boe, bbf.
PHASES of INSANITY.
In some states n phase of insanity
known as Insane Irresistible impulse.
resulting from mental defect or disease,
- recognized as ground OF oxemp-
lion from responsibility for crime
committed under It's influence; II being
held IN these states that II an insane
impulse so oyermasters the viii of a
person as 10 irresistibly impel him TO
the commission OF n homicide, nc Is not
responsible, although he may know the
nature and quality OF his act and may
know that II Ia wrong. 12 eye 16a
| II eye 66b In other states, however
This doctrine is not recognized, and IL
has no place IN the law OF New York.
IN this state It il expressly provided
| ny statute that person Is not excused
from criminal liability as an insane
person except upon proof that. at the
time or committing the alleged erim-
inal act, he was laboring under such
q defect of reason ms either % not 10
know the nature and quality of the
act he was doing; or (2) not 10 know
mat the act was wrong ana further.
that "a morbid propensity to commit
prohibited acts. existing In the mind Of
a person who is not shown to have beer,