A suffers from psychotic episodes, in the course of which she loses control over her physical motions. To retain her mental balance, she is instructed to take a pill every day at 12.00. She knows that if she fails to do so she will lose self-control within a few hours. Under the influence of the pill she is fully aware of her motions and capable of controlling them. When her abusive mother-in-law phones to say that she would be visiting in the afternoon, A decides to do away with her. With full awareness of her act, she chooses not to take the pill, intending to kill her mother-inlaw. When her mother-in-law enters the apartment, A is having a psychotic episode and kills her. She is charged with murder, and pleads the insanity defense. Modern criminal law accepts the legal mechanism of “transformation of fault” in various general defenses, as, for example, intoxication. These mechanisms are based on the European-Continental theory of actio libera in causa, which reproduces the perpetrator’s fault from the point of entering the situation (intoxication, for example) to the point of the physical perpetration of the offense. Thus, if one drinks alcohol deliberately in order to lose control and kill someone, the mental state, at the point of drinking the alcohol (full awareness with specific intent) is copied to the point of the perpetration of the homicide, even if at that time the perpetrator was not aware of his actions. But because insanity is presumed to be natural, no similar legal mechanism is associated with it. A person is not presumed to enter psychotic state of his own free will, although as shown above, such capability exists.