Dylann Roof's lawyers appeal death sentence citing autism

Post Reply New Topic

Maybe you don't understand what I'm asking.

You keep repeating that people who have been subjected to repeated/relentless abuse can snap. Nobody here contested this.

I was aking why do you think that there are also people who have been subjected to relentless abuse, had (at least occasionally) the desire and the opportunity to get revenge through violence and didn't do it?

The way you represent your position, it sounds like you think that victims of abuse are doomed to commit violent crimes

There are still other unclear points about your position in this particular case, but considering how dificult it is to get an answer I'll stick to this one.

Yes there's no indication Roof was abused. The clinical psychologist stated he was obsessed with racist paraphernalia and his schizoid personality trait made him paranoid of blacks

I wonder how one would reconcile being against the death penalty , with the possible means of Roof avoiding the death penalty being one that could lead to more abuse and stigma being directed at those on the spectrum .

I think that's happened a long time ago
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ence_model

In all things, outcomes are probabilistic.

This article is only about legal-defense-for-criminal-action outcome.

In all things, outcomes are probabilistic.

This article is only about legal-defense-for-criminal-action outcome.[/quote]

I have no problem with your arguments as long as there for the benefit of our legal system and not the politics of autism.

The American criminal justice system is to sancitfied and hallowed to be corrupted by politics,whether it's the politics of autism or any other politics.

I believe in defendant's rights and the old adage that "it's better to let 99 guilty people go than convict one innocent person".Our justice system should always take precident over any politics.

Good one, Vermie! Try another!

The defense attorneys HAVE to do this.

They are obligated, by ethics, to find a way not for this guy to be executed.

I don't believe the "autism defense" will work, though. The jury will know that the defense attorneys are grasping for straws.

What meant was that the concept behind our system is to sanctified to be corrupted by political consideration.
I never said corrupt things don't happen in our system,the system fails the public all the time.

What was meant by what I said was that this arguments should be in the betterment of the justice system not the politics of autism or any politics.

Right.

There is a lot of "autism politics" on this topic, without concern for the legal rights of a single (possibly autistic) person.

I glad you understand.

I am aware of our systems faults,matter of fact I was just watching a show about the wrongfully convicted on death row.

What our system strives to stand for should be above politics.

Because the accused rights to be defended by any legal means necessary trumps our right not to be harmed by the stigmas and negative false perceptions we should just shut up?

Feminists have gotten Rape Shield laws passed that have mitigated anything in defending the accused goes no matter who it hurts tactics. While the primary purpose of those laws is to protect an accuser a secondary goal was to ease the stigmas of “she was asking for it” or “she should have been more careful”. Attitudes have changed somewhat in this regard. Why are women as a group more deserving of protection then us?

While it does seem that the Law favors women (don't get me started on "Family Court"), I would have to wonder if there may be some connection between this and the practice of teaching little girls that mommy and daddy will fight their battles for them while teaching little boys to stand up for themselves.

In the case of rape shield laws,the victim's past is not relevent to the validity of the present accusations,the defense can still smear the victim but it must be relevent to current proceedings,not former bad acts.

Mental,neurological and intellectual health is all very relevent to the outcome of a court case because of state of mind of the accused at the time of the crime.The accused has the right to make an issue of state of mind because it is so critical to what the accused is actually guilty of.There would not be specified charges without state of mind,most charges assume a state of mind of mental,neuro and intellectual health,but when such health is compromised than the charges change.

The legal system would be compromised beyond repair if the accused could not make an issue out of state of mind.Not to mention there are legit cases of people who did commit crimes while insane or under profound emotional duress and those cases should be handled accordingly.

That gets back to the crux the issue. Autism is not insanty.