"Many Lawful people have circumstances under which they would violate the laws of foreign states they oppose. Furthermore, the jurisdiction argument hasn't been resolved yet."

"Petitioner, your statement is somewhat clarifying."

"We will now hear the jurisdiction argument. Hell, why aren't the petitioner's actions prior to arrival in Golarion within this court's jurisdiction?"

"Your honor, while this court is aware of Earth, the Earth we are aware of differs drastically from the planet the petitioner is from. The petitioner's planet has more advanced technology than the Earth we are familiar with, and lacks religion, R'lyeh, literally any native magic users, that deranged stunt a demigod pulled, et cetera. The idea that our information on Earth prepares us to judge actions taken in the petitioner's region is, frankly, absurd. Furthermore, while Heaven brings up the petitioner's home planet's radio broadcasts, those are tangential, as this court appears unlikely to place a radio satellite for gathering background regarding a single petitioner."

"One of the typical reasons we typically can't rely almost entirely on information directly coded in the soul about events to issue judgements is that mortals will very frequently self-delude including on an instinctive level. Examination of the effect on this petitioner produced significant evidence that he was not capable of this."

"Do you have a cite for that being a typical reason, or are you speculating?"

"I'm speculating as to the thoughts of a reasonable psychopomp, due to my interactions with many such psychopomps and their writings."

('Reasonable psychopomp'. Suuuuure. Pharasmin 'neutrality' is fundamentally unreasonable.)

"Does anyone have any further arguments regarding jurisdiction?"

Nobody does.

"I'm ruling that the petitioner's time on his planet of origin is not within this court's jurisdiction. We will now move on to other arguments."

"Given this ruling, and the petitioner's commentary on what actions he would prefer to have taken in Cheliax, I think the petitioner is systemically Neutral."

"You're probably going to send him to the Boneyard because he's never done anything by his free will here and his memories suggest he took care of his siblings, but I do think in a Chelish context if the petitioner had been agentic he'd have aimed for Chaotic Good. And then probably gotten Maledicted, but, well, if ifs and ands were eyes and hands, you all would be a lot less boring."

"I have seen no serious evidence against my opening argument regarding the petitioner's moral alignment. If the petitioner's life prior to Golarion is outside this court's jurisdiction, his moral behavior consists essentially entirely of Good goals warped to what would have been Evil ends which in fact failed to materialize. The lack of impact is classically Neutral, as is the mixture of Good and Evil, and various discounting applied to compelled action makes it in this context similar to incapability of action, which is also classically Neutral. Many of my fellows have brought up counterfactuals, but this court rules not on counterfactual petitioners but rather those who are present. Given this, while the petitioner may be Lawful at heart and belong more in Axis than in the Boneyard, the appropriate ruling on this petitioner's alignment as determined from his life in Golarion seems likely to be True Neutral."

(Pff, Axis is agreeing with em. That's hilarious. Ey grows some burning snowflake flowers about it.)

"This mischaracterizes the petitioner. We need to look at In re Vona here. Using Evil means to pursue Evil goals is Evil. Having your scheme hijacked to serve a different form of Evil is not a mitigating factor, nor is that goal eventually failing for reasons unrelated to you."

The angel's paper rings tighten inward, almost developing pleats, and her eyes narrow, but she doesn't speak.

"In the case of Vona, the petitioner used Evil means, namely undeath and killing numerous noncombatants, to pursue the Evil goal of using a powerful artifact for mass undeath. This resulted in an Evil dragon temporarily acquiring the artifact for his own purposes before being imprisoned. This case is similar. The petitioner's evil means include the use of slave labor, knowingly infecting others with diseases, and other acts. The disease infection case is particularly notable because, while many of my counterparts may argue that the petitioner's mindstate was not conducive to culpability in the case of slave labor, the petitioner anticipated that his work would lead to more people deliberately infecting nonconsenting parties with diseases than would otherwise occur. As for evil goals, we see some consideration of mass undeath, some desire to increase the rate of petitioners arriving in Hell, some interest in making abortion more appealing as a procedure, other more minor focuses."

And the imp slightly raises an eyebrow at the caviidal. "And I don't think we have serious disagreements over whether Rasdovain's aims here were Evil, do we?"

First off, just because Pharasma puts up with these sorts of veiled threats in her courts doesn't mean they merit respect.

Secondly … on the non-threat level, the imp is right. Arguing about Rasdovain here is just not a good use of the court's patience. No doubt this will earn more smirks from the imp about cowardice or such, but it's still true.

Thirdly, if Hell is seriously making arguments like "the petitioner's attempts to develop a smallpox vaccination program are Evil", that's actually very promising, because that's a stretch which Hell, if they did their research, knows is a stretch. (It's convenient for lookups when a petitioner is trying to emulate specific known people who've already been tried, or in this case weird foreign versions of them.)

"Your honor, please see In re Jenner. It's not a standard reference, but we've brought copies. To summarize, popularizing an effective smallpox prevention method is Good, even if it predictably causes some people to coercively expose others to disease."

A pause, for copy distribution.

At the nosoi's nod, the caviidal continues. "As we've discussed, the petitioner was unaware of his use of slave labor, as well as the nature of Hell. His interests in abortion were formed without knowing a fetus's age of ensoulment, and have other very strongly mitigating factors which I can go into if necessary."

"Additionally, describing cryopreservation as undeath is misleading. Nonmagical brain preservation, a process which essentially consists in this context of poisoning and freezing a body, does not meet any standard criteria for undeath. It does not prevent the soul from moving to its destination. It does not use negative energy. It does not create a creature animated by spiritual or supernatural forces. It does not prevent the use of a Raise Dead or Reincarnate effect. It does not depend on Urgathoa's infrastructure damage. There is, so far as I can tell, no reasonable definition of 'undeath' that applies to cryopreservation."

"As for the petitioner's intentions regarding cryopreservation, they can be modeled as a desire to create a low-maintenance version of Gentle Repose, or to petrify consenting people who feared Abaddon, neither of which are Evil."

"In re Jenner was wrongly decided. Generally this court acts as though spreading disease to gain some measure of protection from it is Evil."

And of course Abaddon didn't bring cites. "I believe the Abaddon representative is referring to cases such as In re Zenderholm."

"In re Zenderholm doesn't generalize to this case. Zenderholm offered service to Urgathoa, whose causes include disease, in the hopes of being personally spared from harm. A reasonable person in Zenderholm's position would expect that this would lead to more net harm. However, Jenner and the present petitioner both reasonably expected their actions to lead to less net harm, and history has shown Jenner to be correct, suggesting that the petitioner would have also been correct had he been in the political climate he believed himself to be in and been able to proceed with his plans."

There is indeed a reason why he didn't make that argument himself, yes. But if Abaddon wants to continue betting that Good is emulating the dretch's attentiveness, he'll keep providing cites, it's not the same loss of reputation.