Apart from most of this being moot, due to this being one of the most clear-cut text book examples of self-defense I have ever seen.
You are confusing mental illness with the most severe cases of dementia, senility and psychosis here. Many mentally ill people are sufficiently aware of their condition to discuss it lucidly. Particularly in many cases of PTSD the “insanity” only truly manifests itself when people are highly stressed out, such as when being hunted by vicious and relentless little killers.
While it is true this would usually only reduce the sentence, the important point is that it can help avoid a custodial sentence entirely. Modern psychiatrists, at least over here, prefer to treat everybody including “convicts” on an out-patient basis whenever possible to either keep them integrated into society or else help them integrate. To that end if this were a Dutch criminal case my mc would most likely be looking at treatment in what is called a “half open” institution, where one can leave for school or work during the day but they have to check in every night (and are usually treated in the weekends whenever possible). To my mc actually living on Olympus in a room with a spying, annoying roommate in a room he doesn’t even have the keys to already is a lot like living in such an institution.
And considering the mc is and was a minor when committing the alleged offense his records would likely be purged upon successful completion of his treatment.
I wouldn’t likely need to plead PTSD at all, if this where anywhere near a competent modern court then the Olympus (Greek) courts exercise of jurisdiction here would be highly shaky, considering we both killed Saxon in the US and are, for all intents and purposes a US citizen. The Oympus court seems to be basing its jurisdictional competence here solely on the fact that Saxon was an Olympus/Greek citizen, which is a very weak claim, particularly considering they have no actual evidence against us.
Which is the main problem with everything on Olympus it’s not a free and fair jurisdiction and our trial will in all likelihood be more like the old witch hunt “trials”. Maybe we’ll get a drowning or “trial by fire” test. If we float on or above the water or don’t burn then we’ll be executed for being a witch, if on the other hand we drown or burn then our guilt or innocence is “not conclusively proven either way” but we’ll still be equally dead for it.
Most likely, yes?
Just think about it: we’re most likely presumed guilty until we prove ourselves to be innocent. We are tried by people who are already prejudiced against us, likely not given a lawyer, etc.
Then there is its weakest point: the basis of its Jurisdiction. It seems to be asserting jurisdiction here on the principle of passive nationality, that is Saxon was a citizen of Olympus/Greece. The problem with this kind of jurisdiction, particularly when applying it to foreign nationals is that it can be extraordinarily hard for the accused to properly defend himself in a country where they know neither the law nor often the language and therefore have a high chance of not being able to obtain proper legal counsel. More practically using this kind of Jurisdiction also makes it potentially very hard to obtain proper evidence as the scene of the crime would by definition have been outside of the area where the court normally has jurisdiction. Therefore it is best avoided, unless there is already a enough evidence available or the jurisdiction where the alleged criminal acts actually took place is either willing (or forced) to cooperate.
Any competent lawyer would therefore first raise the question of jurisdiction and argue that the court is not competent to try this case since my mc both committed the alleged criminal acts in the US and is himself, for all intents and purposes, a US citizen. So, unless the US authorities have explicitly agreed to cooperate with access to evidence and to transfer this case to Olympus/Greece the appropriate venue would be a US court and the appropriate legal standards would be US self-defense law(s) and jurisprudence.
Then there is the fact that their case against the mc is extremely weak, even if we did kill Saxon, they don’t know that and really short of mind-rape they can’t know that. Even the dagger is circumstantial evidence at best. How did my mc obtain the dagger? Maybe he found it while dumpster diving (and it was dumped there by whoever killed or made the other “seekers” disappear too).
So in short, barring guilty until proven innocent they even lack the proper evidence to even bring a case, that combined with the fact that whatever “court” or judicial system Olympus has is likely to dismiss all common legal standards as “procedural niceties” likely makes it possibly the very textbook definition of a Kangaroo court for our mc’s as whether something is a Kangaroo court or not depends on how the court conducts itself, not on the actual guilt or innocence of the people brought before it.
From Wikipedia: “A kangaroo court is a judicial tribunal or assembly that blatantly disregards recognized standards of law or justice” ,which is very likely the kind of “justice” we’ll be subject to on Olympus.
It says absolutely nothing either way about the guilt or innocence of the persons brought before it regarding what they are accused of having done.
Well my field is Dutch criminal law (with a minor in EU law) so I do have a distinct lack of legal knowledge when it comes to say US tax law (which is apparently so hideously complex it gives the professors who teach it at Ivy League nightmares) or the subject I dreaded most during the one time I was forced to take it: Commercial mergers and acquisitions (even if that is the field where a shit ton of money can be made quickly over here).
Fun fact our self-defense jurisprudence places a fairly strong, some might even say disproportionate, emphasis on the duty of a reasonable adult to yield or retreat and if not on the proportionality of force used. However even under our strict interpretation of the right to self-defense being cornered on a rooftop by a clearly homicidal maniac who has been relentlessly chasing us for years now would nevertheless be a clear case of self-defense, even killing him is arguably a proportional use of force since he was out to do the same to us as he was clearly after our life here, not our car or wallet or other, mere material possession.
Which is very true of course and the Netherlands has the distinction of having one of the least permissive interpretations of the right to self-defense.
From my understanding many US states have so-called “stand your ground laws” that eliminate the reasonable duty to retreat or yield, which would make our defense against Saxon truly a legal no-brainer. .