Amnesia.
I have not put forward that as a defence against charges. I have suggested it as reason for not being able to stand and be tried for the offence(s). What does amnesia mean. It may well represent a mask, a symptom of much more serious underlying psychological disturbance/ condition resultant from the accident whereby a reasonable defence cannot be mounted against the charges. Just try and imagine what AH may actually seen out of the wind shield of his aircraft in the last few seconds before the crash. Could he have not seen a crowd of people and vehicles in the path of his doomed aircraft. Could he have been oblivious to his own imminent death and of all those standing transfixed with faces up turned to the sky, moments before their lives were extinguished in front of him on the ground. When did the mercy of unconsciousness remove the horror of such an image from his mind. But what was it replaced with. I cannot conceive any normal human being not being affected by such a tragedy, particularly the person who has the capacity to feel any sense of responsibility for being an instrument for its cause. The question therefore is the nature and extent of the injury or trauma that such a person may have suffered. If such a person has by reason of such trauma, be reduced to such a pathetic state as a blabbering idiot or a catatonic moron, then would any court stand him up and try him. Perhaps a court in some demonic regime might do just that, but I doubt any over in our neck of the world would. So perhaps it is over to the shrinks and the lawyers to decide what next, with the police somewhere in between the two to decide what next.