R. vs. GRUMAH

(His lordship stated the facts, and proceeded:-) The only point for decision in this appeal is whether the verdict should have been one of guilty but insane. The appellant was described as really fond of the children, against whom it was impossible to imagine that he might have malice. The landlord, father of the deceased child, testified to the appellant’s general good character, and also to what he (the landlord) believed to be the state of the appellant’s mind when he committed the act in respect of which he was charged. In his opinion, based upon the appellant’s behaviour during the four days preceding the commission of the offence, the appellant was insane. He testified that the appellant (1) without any reason whatsoever decided to stop work and to return to his home-town; (2) refused money to pay his fare home; (3) unceremoniously disappeared from the house to the surprise of the inmates; (4) did not in fact return to his home-town, but sojourned in the forest, and...