Asperger's as a defense in court -- my unpopular opinion

Post Reply New Topic

I realize there are a lot of posters here on WrongPlanet who disagree with the notion of using Asperger's Syndrome as a defense in criminal court cases. You feel as if it categorizes us as mentally handicapped, and incapable of controlling our actions, and further skews the already misrepresented image of Asperger's in the media and in popular culture.

I can understand this point of view, and I totally agree. However, I would like to put up my own argument for the use of Asperger's as a defense.

While the image of Asperger's may take a battering in such an event, I would not stop at anything in an attempt to spare myself a term in prison. To use Asperger's as a defense always benefits the individual in question. I am inherently selfish and arrogant, and in such a situation I would not take heed of the effects of my actions and my lawyer's actions throughout the court case. I would not pay attention to those who protest my particular method of defense. In a time of trouble, the individual must always do what is right unto themselves first and foremost, at the expense of what is right for others.

And who are the others but a large group of individuals? Individuals who would not think twice about sacrificing their principles in exchange for their freedom (and this goes for everyone, not just Aspies). It's a fundamental facet of our nature, to save our own ass before we consider anything else. For every person sullying the name of Asperger's Syndrome there is someone else who affords it good intentions. My own individual actions cannot really be considered detrimental to the Asperger's population of the world as a whole, as it is far too large, and is made up of individuals.

Although the principle in the argument against the use of Asperger's Syndrome as a defense in a criminal trial is understandable and wholly logical, it's the reality on which we must depend, and the reality is that that principle is rendered totally impractical, as a result of human nature.

Sounds fair to me.......I expect most people wouldn't worry much about the risk of bringing Aspies into disrepute if the alternative were a long prison sentence. I also suspect that the main problem for the Aspie public image is that most people are unaware of AS, or they don't believe it really exists.

^^ Greetings Squidward. Thank you very much indeed for your happy little post. ^^ I am very sorry however, as I perhaps disagree a little concerning the part in which you state that all individuals would sacrifice their principles for their freedom. I am veyr sorry if I am horrible, however I believe it is very difficult to speak for all individuals and an exception to such a rule is always possible. ^^ For instance, in many cases you may state that perhaps carers sacrifice their own freedom for the well being of others (that is, in this case, the individual that they are caring for). I am vvery sorry however as this is but my happy belief and most possible incorrect.

The true nature of a person comes out when faced with life altering events. The risk of losing freedom, or even one's life brings out the best or the worst in a person.

If AS contributes to why a person committed a crime, it should be considered... not make them exempt from the law.

Asperger's as a defense in court

Actually I don't see a single sentence where Asperger can be used as an excuse to avoid it without the unknowledge of the jury.
I can understand if you use Aspe for:
"resisting arrest", "screaming in a supermarket" or things like that, but actually (I don't know USA situation) usually they don't finish with long jail entrapment in Italy.
Things that get you in prison for a long time are usually financial things and things concerning violence (murderer, sex-violence, etc.) and those things have nothing to do with "Asperger" and probably a jury will not see it as an excuse. If you do that it's easyier to state a BPD or Schizofrenia instead of AS. AS are seen as strange but not-hurting from the common believe so I think that it can't be used as a "good" excuse.
I've used it in the past as an excuse "Sorry I didn't remember to do that, I was too focused on that" but they aren't thing for wich I should go to prison.

P.S.
The only real things that I think can make AS not a total excuse (you'll not avoid jaw for it but probably you can get a "discount") is due to sensory overload. For istance suppose that you are in a supermarket (so already overloaded) and someone start harrasing you with words and you go full meltdown and kick him in the face. Saying to the jury that his speaking have hurted you as if he was kicking you because you have AS could reduce the jail time but obviously will not be seen as a "full excuse" and it's actually the only case that come in my mind as a possible AS-to-avoid-jail

In the US, you can have a documented mental illness and a history of bad behavior and still go to prison for the rest of your life. The argument is whether or not you knew what you did was wrong, not whether or not you had control over yourself.

I don't know that AS would even matter if you did something bad enough to get significant jail time.

I think whether a criminal would use AS as an excuse, depends on the legal system where tha tperson lives. You know, being sent to a state hospital possibly for life (if you can'tbe treated to the satisfaction of the shrink in charge there), may be worse than a defined number of years in prison. Then again, this is only the case in countries like the Netherlands where very long prison sentences are rare (the man who murdered a famous politician in 2002, got 18 years), and until a recent change in law, people were pretty much automatically granted parole after having served two-thirds of their sentence. I recently read a book by a former state hospital inmate (convicted of manslaughter on his girlfriend), and he said he'd much rather have served a longer term in prison (he was senteced to five years plus state hospital treatment, but was transferred to the state hospital midway through his prison time) than been in the state hospital, despite its superficially better conditions.

Another point in the discussion if Asperger's as insanity defense, is, of course, that insanity should not be based on someone's label only. You know,s chizophrenia is a common insanity defense, but should that be abandoned just because the vast majority of schizophrenics are not criminals and their image will be harmed? I hold, actually, that Asperger's can be a legitimate insanity defense in soem situations.

It is my experience that one may be Aspie and criminal. But they are not criminal because they are Aspie.

As for your blog entry on your friend 'A': since D's sister is not a religious authority figure, what does her opinion have to do with God's opinion? Whether A gets into heaven is not up to D's sister, you know. That is why the religious believe that God is omnipotent.

I would be interested in knowing if D's sister was a brother, what despicable name you would be calling him that alludes to his gender.