(5) Evidence of relatives about the general behavior of the accused and the reputation he enjoyed for sanity and insanity in the neighbourhood; (6) Evidence showing that insanity appears in the family history of the accused." Further see Kure v. The State (1988) 1 NWLR (pt. 72) 404; R v. Inyang (1946) 12 WACA 5; Onakpiya v. Queen (1959) 5 FSC 150; Karimu v. The State (1989) 1 NWLR (pt. 96) 124; Ogbu v. The State (1992) 10 SCNJ 88 at 99; Okon Edoho v. The State (2010) 4 SCNJ 100, all to the effect that this burden on the defence is generally discharged on a preponderance of evidence or a balance of probability. Therefore, the prosecution has no duty or business in proving sanity or insanity of an accused person. The complaint of the appellant against his conviction is that the learned trial judge did not properly evaluate his evidence with respect to his involuntary intoxication and make specific findings on it. The law is that when there is a complaint that the trial court did not evaluate evidence properly and make findings based on the evidence placed before him, the appellate court, is in as good a position as the trial court to do its own evaluation of the evidence laid before the court. And if the appellate court finds that there are inadequacies on the part of the trial court in the evaluation of evidence before it, the former has a duty to examine the conclusions and inferences drawn by the latter and then do its own reevaluation of the evidence in order to come to its judgment, to see that justice is done. Atolagbe v. Shorun (1985) 1 NWLR (pt. 2) 360; Narumai & Sons Nig Ltd. v. Niger Benue Transport Co. Ltd (1989) 2 NWLR (pt.106) 730; Durugo v. The State (1992) 7 NWLR (pt. 255) 525 at 535; Adegboyega Ibikunle v. The State (2007) 1 SCNJ 207; Yakubu v. UBA, Plc (2012) 25 WRN 113 at 153. I have perused painstakingly, the evaluation of the pieces of evidence placed at the disposal of the learned trial judge and at pages 166 - 169 of the record of appeal where he found, to the effect that: - From Exhibits 'A' and 'D' - the confessional statements of the appellant, he was conscious of everything before and after the act; - His drinking of four bottles of small Guinness stout and the purchase of a bottle of stout for the girl he had sexual intercourse with in the hotel and also gave her N150,00 as well as the purchase of a bottle of stout for the bar man at the 2nd East Circular Road, were his own deliberate decisions, unsolicited by anyone; - It is clear from Exhibits A and D that the appellant's decision to buy Indian Hemp at Sapele Road, Benin City for the sum of N500.00 which he smoked on 5/4/03, part of which he gave to some boys around there was his own deliberate decisions;