Final answer:
The current formulations of diminished responsibility defenses vary by jurisdiction, with mental illness and intellectual disabilities considered in determining responsibility and competency to stand trial. These legal standards reflect the complexity of mental health in the justice system.
Step-by-step explanation:
The current formulations of various diminished responsibility defenses vary greatly across jurisdictions, as indicated in the option B. This is because different states and countries have their own legal definitions and thresholds for what constitutes diminished responsibility due to mental illness or intellectual disabilities. For instance, the Atkins v. Virginia case determined that individuals with intellectual disabilities have diminished capacities that affect decision-making, which should then influence the nature of their punishment. Competency to stand trial, as established in cases such as Dusky v. United States and Godinez v. Moran, is also a critical component in determining responsibility and the application of justice. The law recognizes that mental health conditions can influence a person's ability to understand, process information, and control impulses, which may reduce culpability but does not exempt an individual from criminal sanctions.