Miller claimed to be sane before and after the killing but insane during the time the crime was committed. his attorneys asked that, at the end of the trial, the jury be instructed on the issue of temporary insanity and that they be told that "regardless of its duration, legal insanity that existed at the time of the commission of the crime is a defense to the crime." why do you think that the trial court refused to give the jury instructions regarding the insanity defense, which the defendant wished to have communicated?