US v.

Vaquilar (Killing his Wife and Daughter)

Facts: Evaristo Vaquilar was found guilty of killing his wife and his daughter, as well as injuring
other persons with a bolo. Eyewitnesses testified that the defendant appeared to be insane prior
to the commission of the crimes. They also testified that the appellant was complaining of pains
in his head and stomach prior to the killing. The witnesses evidence for insanity include:

appellants eyes were very big and red with his sight penetrating at the time he was killing
his wife.

he looked at me he was crazy because if he was not, he wouldnt have killed his family

at the moment of cutting those people, he looked like a madman; crazy because he would
cut anybody at random

sister said, then he pursued me.he must have been crazy because he cut me

Issue: Whether or not these pieces of evidence are sufficient to declare the accused as insane,
therefore exempt from criminal liability.
Held: The evidence is insufficient to declare him insane. The appellants conduct was consistent
with the acts of an enraged criminal, not of a person with an unsound mind at the time he
committed the crimes. The fact that a person acts crazy is not conclusive that he is insane. The
popular meaning of crazy is not synonymous with the legal terms insane. The conduct of the
appellant after he was confined in jail is not inconsistent with the actions of a sane person (not
saying a word in the cell, crying out loud at night) who has reflected and felt remorse after the
commission of the crime.
The court further held that mere mental depravity, or moral insanity which results not from any
disease of the mind, but from a perverted condition of the moral system where the person is
mentally sane, does not exempt one from criminal responsibility. In the absence of proof that the
defendant had lost his reason or became demented after a few moments prior to or during the
perpetration of the crime, it is presumed that he was in a normal state of mind.