Six years for Aspie who drove into woman

Post Reply New Topic

Not the sort of publicity we want.

Also note two of the statements in the article that are far from universally true of Aspies and were probably just used to attempt the guy's defence: "He has little or no sex drive, which is entirely in line with his condition" and "it was common for Asperger's sufferers to lash out in anger".

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-centra ... nto-woman/

He was an incestious pedophile they should have given him life. "He has little or no sex drive, which is entirely in line with his condition." that should read little or no sex drive with adult women who are not related him. The man is a sex predator I wonder how many idiots are going to defend him here just because he has autism. Trash like this makes us all look bad.

Paedophile? Quite possibly.

Incestuous?? May I make a reminder from the article that it wasn't his own niece he was meeting, but a woman's (plantiff's) niece?

Well, I wasn't the first in this thread to use the word paedophile to describe him. Even when I did I said "quite possibly", which (perhaps as a literal Aspie interpreter) meant possible, not certain, i.e. I'm not saying with certainty that he is. Other posters, on the other hand, said he was an incestuous paedophile as if it was a statement of fact, or seconded and thirded that fact. I would be very ashamed and embarrassed if I had said with certainty that he is a paedophile, especially when "paedophile" tends to be a word used very loosely to take in, just for the sake of it, a wide range of people other than just actual paedophiles. Believe me, I more than most people should know that only too well.

It could by legal definition, but the thing I don't get is where is the proof he was trying to have sex with a 15 year old girl? I see no where mentioned any solid evidence of this.

^That.

You humans and your definition is getting based off someone's else standard. While I don't support illegal activities at all and I'm not defending the person, I also hardly support basing moral opinion solely on the law unless it is for legal reasons. If you guys want to argue in behalf of the laws in this country or other countries, then I'll take up the opinion as well.There are different age of consent meaning that the person might not be considered a pedophile everywhere and the vast majority of the country's age of consent is 16 while there are places where they consider 16 years old the age of adult. Another thing is that a possibility is more logical than certain given by the global rules and the fact that teenagers that young can be independent as shown by the emancipated adolescents meaning they have a power to make their own choice whether it is for the right or wrong. The point is to look into the behaviors of the two individuals instead of their age and I believe in the idea that anyone dominated by another person by willful force or manipulation for the intention of harm regardless of age differences is wrong no matter the age differences even if it consented. My standard goes as far as If there is no actual harm done or any damages done while it is consented with a minor age differences such as 3-4 years of differences for individuals near 16 (age of consent in most countries) to 9 years of age differences for individuals over 80, then it's ok by my standard. Since the person is 21 years old coming into a 15 years old, then it's wrong by my standard.