Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-02-15
Judae Beans Charge to Jury

Judge Beane said in part in his
charge to the jury at the afternoon
session:
"A person cannot be held response
Bile for or be guilty of a crime. I'M
less he has sufficient capacity. men
tai and otherwise. to commit 1t, there
fore want of such capacity is conf
plete defense and not merely a miti-
eating circumstance. In other words.
one who is so insane as to be in
capable of entertaining criminal in
tent, which is one Of the essential
ingredients of crime. cannot be guilty
of crime and held criminally respon-
sible for this act.
while this question Of insanity as
affecting accountability for criminal
acts has given rise to much judicial
discussion and there seems to be
some conflict of opinion and some
confusion on some points. | believe
the law has been we'll determined in
this State and therefore at this time
will give you this rule which you will
apply in this case. When the insan-
ity Of the accused is pleaded in de-
fence, the test of his responsibility for
crime is his capacity to understand
the nature and quality OF the act at
the time he committed it. This is the
proper legal criterion. That is. if the
accused knew the quality of the act
and could distinguish between right
and wrong with respect to the act at
the time of the commission of the act.
then he possesses what is called pun
disability.
Time is familiar element which
must enter into your deliberations un-
der the plea Of insanity to render it
effective as a defense. It must appear
either by direct testimony or pre-
sumptively that the accused was in
sane at the time the act was commit
ted and not merely prior or subse-
ity does not excuse or exempt him
from responsibility If 1t appears that
he had recovered from such insanity
previous to the commission of the
crime but having once been proven
to have been insane before the crime
was committed, it will be presumed
that the insanity continued to the
time Of the crime. may also state
that there is presumption that all
men are sane and this presumption
continues until proof satisfactory is
introduced to show the contrary
ITO further emphasize and make
clear. let me state it in this way.
Every man is presumed to be sane
and to possess a sufficient degree of
reason to be responsible for his acts
NJ ho fY. h..
satisfaction.
Wherefore. under a defence on the
ground of insanity you must be sat-
isfied by the evidence in the case that
at the time of the commission of the
act the respondent was laboring un-
der such defect of reason from dis
ease of the mind or otherwise as not
to know the nature and quality of the
act he was doing, or if he did know
the nature and quality he did not
know he was doing what was wrong.
Was Mrs. Cole killed? Was she
unlawfully killed? Did the person
who killed her do it Of malice afore-
thought. either express or implied?
Did this respondent do it? II she
was unlawfully killed by this re-
spOndent with malice aforethought
and he was sane at the time. he was
guilty Of murder. II Mrs Cole was
killed by this respondent
in the heat of passion. on sudden
without express or i'm
piled malice aforethought, and he was
sane at the time. he is guilty Of man.
laughter. II the respondent did not
kni Or was justified in killing. he is
not guilty under this indictment.
If he was insane at the time he