Perhaps I am missing something here, Trooper, but, to me, “innocence” and “reduced culpability” are completely different issues. “Innocence” to me implies that
someone has done nothing wrong, while “reduced culpability” implies that
someone has done something objectively wrong but cannot be considered to be fully responsible for their actions.
If VICPOL do indeed have “solid gold” evidence as you suggest, re. the accused’s murderous actions, the only wriggle room would seem to be around issues of intent, culpability,
mens rea….?
Could the accused have committed the alleged murder while sleepwalking (for example), as per. Lady Macbeth?
mens rea
noun
LAW
- the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.
"a mistaken belief in consent meant that the defendant lacked mens rea"
JMHO
(just my humble opinion)