In People v. Gorshen (1959) 51 Cal.2d 716, the defendant killed his foreman, and was charged with murder. (Gorshen, supra, 51 Cal.2d at pp. 719, 720-721.) During a bench trial on the charge, a psychiatrist testified that the defendant suffered from chronic paranoiac schizophrenia, resulting in a "disintegration of mind and personality." (Id. at p. 722.) In finding the defendant guilty of second degree murder, the trial judge stated that although the psychiatrist's theories were "correct" and defendant "had no particular intent to commit the crime," his "hands were tied by the then-existing legal jurisprudence." (Id. at p. 725.) Although our Supreme Court held that the psychiatrist's testimony was admissible to negate the mental states required for murder and manslaughter, it rejected the defendant's contention that the judge's remarks demonstrated error, namely, his failure to give due weight to the testimony due to a mistake of law. (Id. at pp. 734.) In determining that the remarks were subject to the rule discussed above, the court found there was a "fair interpretation" of the remarks that showed no misapprehension of law. (Id. at pp. 734-735.) The court concluded that notwithstanding the judge's remark that his hands were tied, the judge "did in truth finally decide that his fact finding hands were not tied . . . because he received, considered and gave effect to the expert's testimony on the issues to which it was pertinent." (Id. at p. 735.)