Some further reading on the Legal Point of "premeditation".
In the case,
Commonwealth vs Carroll
The defendant killed his wife after an argument. On appeal he argued that it couldn't have been premeditated because there was not enough time for him to premeditate the killing. In ruling against his appeal the following opinions were given.
[ QUOTE ]
We find no merit in defendant's analogy or contention. As Chief Justice MAXEY appropriately and correctly said in Commonwealth v. Earnest. . . : "Whether the intention to kill and the killing, that is, the premeditation and the fatal act, were within a brief space of time or a long space of time is immaterial if the killing was in fact intentional, wilful, deliberate and premeditated. . . . As Justice AGNEW said in Com. v. Drum: 'The law fixes upon no length of time as necessary to form the intention to kill, but leaves the existence of a fully formed intent as a fact to be determined by the jury, from all the facts and circumstances in the evidence.'"
[/ QUOTE ]
PairTheBoard