California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Pensinger, 278 Cal.Rptr. 640, 52 Cal.3d 1210, 805 P.2d 899 (Cal. 1991):
There is also some evidence of motive. The district attorney argued that defendant was motivated by an incomprehensible need for revenge over the theft of his rifle. Respondent points to evidence of defendant's conduct before the killing which suggested that defendant killed the child in order to have sexual intercourse with her. Although either motivation was totally unreasonable, this is true of any senseless killing, but the incomprehensibility of the motive does not mean that the jury could not reasonably infer that the defendant entertained and acted on it. (People v. Wright (1985) 39 Cal.3d 576, 593, 217 Cal.Rptr. 212, 703 P.2d 1106.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.