-122-
Crown to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a
reasonable doubt so that you can feel sure.
If you
entertain doubt and you don't feel sure as to the
voluntariness or involuntariness of the act, the reason-
ableness of the instrument used, as to the mental capacity,
if you
his abnormality of mind, Members of the Jury,
entertain a reasonable doubt you will have to give the
benefit of that doubt to the accused person.
It is not a burden that
Members of the Jury at request of Counsel, they would
like me to say something more. I am to tell you about
insanity and the burden of proof. Where the Defence
raises the defence of insanity, the burden is upon the
defence to show that that person did not have the mental
capacity. It is a burden that they must discharge on
a balance of probabilities.
they have to prove to you for you to feel sure. If the
Defence raises this issue of insanity and they told you
that having regard to all the facts, this person is
insane, they have to show that at the time of committing
the act, the accused was labouring under such a defect
of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the
nature and quality of the act he was doing or if he did
know it, that he did not know that it was wrong in
law; but they have to do this on a balance of probabilities.
The burden is not the burden that the Crown has. The
Crown's burden is to prove beyond reasonable doubt, to prove
so that you can feel sure. On the issue once again of
diminished responsibility Members of the Jury, I raise
this point because Counsel has asked me too. This
diminished responsibility is not really a concept that is
within our statute books, but the Defence has raised it
10
15
20
25
30
Page 165Page 166