Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)

Subject: Ethics of Aspies on juries
From: Jack Campin
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 02:03 PM

This is an ethical question unlike any I've seen before.

I have some dealings with a guy who has either Asperger's or autism, with some associated intellectual deficits like basic arithmetic. (I can't pretend to like him one little bit). He has really fucked-up perceptions of what other people perceive and want - almost zero "theory of mind".

And he's doing jury service, in a trial that's been going on for a long time and must be very serious. With so little understanding of even normal people in normal situations, what chance is there he'll have any clue about the extremes involved in a major crime?

This seems to me to be a situation where "just give them the right to be themselves" doesn't work at all. His interpersonal incompetence has to be fucking up somebody else's rights.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries
From: Senoufou
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 02:25 PM

Looking at the UK Gov websites, it would appear that one has to have quite severe mental incapacity in order to be ineligible for jury service.

Autism/Apergers is on a sliding scale of disability, so a blanket exclusion would be unworkable.

I would agree with you Jack on principle that the seriousness of deciding a verdict in a Court of Law requires absolutely normal mental capacity.

My niece has mild Aspergers, and would be a rather strange addition to any jury. But I fear that she would be obliged to attend nonetheless.
Not ideal. And not fair on the defendant either!

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 03:03 PM

Gee, that's a tough one. I have someone in my family with Asperger's, and sometimes I shudder at the thought of what society expects or allows him to do. But he actually gets along in life quite well and holds down a responsible job and has lots of people who like him.

How would he do on jury duty? Well, he tends to see things in a legalistic manner, as black-and-white with no shades of grey. But a lot of people are like that.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 04:18 PM

I know someone close that has Asperger's. But also has several degrees and lectures on the subject. Would be as capable on a jury as anyone else.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 05:12 PM

3 out of 4 posters here judge different as dangerous based on perception of a relation or relationship. How would they judge Jews or Immigrants? To apply racial theories, normal takes on a purity, a quality of health and tribal similarities. Even normal can be monstrous under certain circumstances. But we can not think ourselves anything but good and normal to uphold rank in the tribe.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Senoufou
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 05:25 PM

My niece has a good maths degree and a very highly-paid job in finance. But her 'emotional capacity' is a little skewed, and she finds socialising difficult. She often doesn't 'get' what people are talking about, and has some 'off-centre' ideas and philosophies.

I can't see what 'Jews or Immigrants' have got to do with Aspergers.

In the case of immigrants, the UK Gov information does state that linguistic capacity is necessary. Obviously, a juror must be able to understand what is going on during the trial.

It is indeed dangerous for a juror who hasn't got the mental capacity to be playing a part in deciding a defendant's guilt/innocence. A long prison sentence or an inappropriate failure to convict are both dangerous.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Mysha
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 07:20 PM

Hi,

Let's skip all the discrimination-or-not and capable-or-not bits: I don't WANT to be on a jury. As far as I can see, anyone in their right mind, and I'll let that include allists as well, should be terrified of the idea of having to fulfil a job they are absolutely not trained for, that mostly depends on weighing the importance of incomplete, and likely in part incorrect, information, and that can seriously affect a person's life. [Cases where the decision could even end a person's life as a form of punishment, should be illegal altogether.]

Juries are asked to just determine whether or not someone broke the law, and the law is codified. It's a black-and-white decision, as the nuance of exactly how guilty is the domain of the judge. It's based on strict rules (except where the laws don't function properly to begin with). Obviously, either autists are the best jurors to go through such a strict system, or the whole concept of a jury to determine guilt is broken to begin with.

In several such systems, we shouldn't even BE jurors, BTW, unless the suspect is a fellow autist. Such systems use words like "a jury of his equals", and as can be seen from this very thread, autists and allists are not seen as equals.


Bye
                                                               Mysha

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 07:23 PM

Hmmmmmm...... I'm thinking of other decision-making groups I've served on, not having done jury duty. My gut reactioj and my experience of bodies of 12 is that any group of 12 will have geniuses, oddballs, and dolts-- which the process at hand deals with.

I think if the prosecutor or defense didn't wash him out, it's going to have to be left to the jury foreperson and, if irresponsible irregularities are occurring, that foreperson would probably go to the judge. Hopefully there are alternate jurors serving, or it could all go down the drain in a mistrial after everyone's hard work. Some mistrials trigger double jeopardy.

You have another option, depending how you feel about the case-- tipping off the side you support... if that's the defense and the jury finds a Guilty verdict you don't support, you might provide the accused good grounds for an appeal. But at this stage of the trial, unless your concern is that this individual could free a dangerous guilty person, it probably has to play out- I suppose you could call an attorney for advice.

~S~

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jeri
Date: 19 Jun 18 - 08:20 PM

I think everybody's different, and it depends on the person.

Mysha, I think there's enough variance in neurotypical folks that the Aspergers, by itself, isn't the biggest qualifying or disqualifying factor. There are probably autistic folks who are more like me than neurotypicals. I don't know them all.

I don't know what happens if there's a problem with an individual, but I'd bet it's common enough that there's a way to deal with that situation.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:39 AM

Wisywyg, there won't be 12 people on the jury...

Mistrial seems entirely possible, with the guy dragging deliberations out indefinitely by demanding explanations of the obvious.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Will Fly
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:51 AM

I have known of a trial jury that purposely failed to reach a verdict because of the conduct of one of its members who had some mental condition (not sure what). The jury was released from duty and a new trial, with a new jury, held.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 04:06 AM

Autism covers a wide spectrum. Compared with classic autism, people with Asperger’s have IQs that fall in the normal or even superior range.
In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association recognized the predominance of similarities between Asperger’s syndrome and autism, merging them into a new classification called Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). In the diagnostic system of mental conditions, Asperger’s syndrome no longer exists, having been replaced by ASD. In Ireland Aspergers Syndrome is described as a pervasive development disorder, part of the Autistic Spectrum and is sometimes called high-functioning autism. Aspergers Syndrome is called pervasive because it affects a wide variety of behaviours and abilities. This impacts on the way that individuals with a diagnosis view the world, interact with others and communicate. Each individual is different and to what extent ASD affects them obviously varies. For jury service some may bring a useful focus, at the other extreme some may not be able to cope. Even though those diagnosed reputedly see the world as black and white, to answer the question of suitability for jury service involves shades of grey. In essence some would be ideal for jury service, some would be capable and some should be excused-just like any other random selection of people.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 04:24 AM

Jack, not 12 for UK? How many?

~S~

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Senoufou
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 04:29 AM

Excellent explanation Iains.

I'm all for inclusion and diversity, but 'capacity' is important too.

In every jury, there is probably quite a range of types and personalities. And people from differing backgrounds, age, educational levels and so on. That's to be expected and also desirable. And actually it's very difficult to be 'excused' from Jury Service. They're quite strict about letting people off.

I've attended a few trials at Crown Court, and the proceedings can be long, tedious, convoluted and the legal language used by barristers a bit specialised and technical. Juries work hard to sit through all that and then deliberate among themselves. It must be tiring and stressful, especially if the trial goes on for several weeks.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 05:50 AM

In Scotland (hopefully not part of the UK for much longer) it's 15.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Mysha
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 06:04 AM

Hi,

In no particular order:
- People asking for things that are already clear, is likely how someone with Asperger would view the allists in the jury.
- AFAIK, allists and autists all differ in the same way: Allists set up an image of what they believe to be the state of their world. Autists access their recollection when they need to determine the state of the world. Diagnoses aren't geared towards that difference, though, but instead register differences that derive from this: As any person copes with the world in his own way, this means the diagnosis can only indicate a likelihood.
- There are jury systems where a number of alternates are chosen as well, in case the jury becomes incomplete for some reason.
- If theory of mind is necessary to determine the guilt of a suspect, then the law apparently forces the amateur jury into the field of the professional judge, the latter supposedly being the one to determine the severity. I would say that the problem of who can be on a jury is relatively small when compared to the apparent problem that the whole system doesn't work anymore.
- I would say, jury systems are mostly a historical relic that has no place in today's world, but I haven't done the research to support that with little doubt.

None of the possible problems with jury duty mentioned in this thread so far are autist- or allist-specific. If the system lets in an autist who is fit/unfit for jury duty, that means it also lets in allists that are fit/unfit for jury duty. (There are far more allists than autists.)

Bye,
                                                                Mysha

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 07:42 AM

It’s also worth thinking about whether we can trust juries to make decisions which aren’t based on prejudice, whether that’s based on the defendant’s appearance or background or simply assuming that they’re guilty because they are being charged. Who is to say that a judge does not have exactly the same human traits?

Having a jury of 12 good men and true has the distinct advantage of spreading the risk and thereby hopefully diminishing bias. It is argued that this will give a fairer outcome.
   It could be argued that as Autism is a reduced capacity to interact with people then perhaps they would concentrate on purely the facts and logic, not being distracted by emotion, (Approximating Vulcans in fact) thereby becoming ideal jury material.

    For complex financial trials of long duration perhaps the jury system should be modified or dispensed with.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 08:21 AM

as Autism is a reduced capacity to interact with people then perhaps they would concentrate on purely the facts and logic, not being distracted by emotion

Lacking a theory of mind means you would be unable to judge whether somebody was acting in self-defence - that requires you to work out what they're really thinking, what information is available to them, whether they're telling the truth about how the situation appeared to them at the time.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 08:35 AM

Emotion can blind logic. The scenario outlined above requires an understanding of circumstance to be driven by logic, not emotion. A convincing narrative does not have to be true.


https://psychcentral.com/news/2016/10/14/why-people-with-autism-are-more-logical/111138.html

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 09:17 AM

Hooray Iains! Your view on differently wired kids and adults is enlightened. Catspaw vehemently banished the word 'retard' here. He and I both had dyslexic sons at home. I tried to educate folks about the spectrum and normalcy of autism and dyslexia. Its practically 1 in 10.


As for tribal concepts of normal, there is a slippery slope that dictators use for scape goat and hate purposes. Everyone is subject to the tribal notion of normal and the discord it causes anywhere



It really is a differently wired kids, not differently weird kids. :^/

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 09:21 AM

edit "We both had autistic sons"

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 09:33 AM

The scenario outlined above requires an understanding of circumstance to be driven by logic, not emotion. A convincing narrative does not have to be true.

Is that about my comment on self-defence?

A claim that the accused was acting in self-defence involves a factual judgment about their state of mind at the time - whether they perceived a danger, and whether it was reasonable and justifiable to perceive a danger and act accordingly. It requires complex modelling of the way other people think, and the guy I'm talking about certainly couldn't do it. Nothing whatever to do with what emotions anybody might have about the events. (I've no idea whether this trial actually does involve self-defence, but most criminal accusations involve similarly complicated logic to decide culpability - and autistic/Asperger's people often lack the brain circuits to carry out that logic).

Daniel Dennett's thinking about higher-order intentions is relevant here. If you don't know what they are and can't reason about them, you can no more decide somebody's guilt than a potted plant can.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 09:39 AM

I would hope wysiwg or even Iains was on my jury and not Jack.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 09:58 AM

Jack, 15 is even better than 12. But are you considering the other options I described?

~S~

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 10:08 AM

Also-- alternates?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 12:52 PM

Don't forget voir dire, and jury selection. Where did all the lawyers go long time passing?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 01:41 PM

In UK law jurors can be challenged on selection by both the judge and prosecution.
The arguments in favour of juries are:

A Jury best reflect the views of the society because of random selection from a wide rage of population. When a person's liberty is at stake it is a matter of principle that s/he should be tried by his/her peers.
The jury is regarded by the public as the ‘bulwark of individual liberties'.
Fact-finding is a matter of common sense and does nor require any specialized legal training
The opinion of the 12 jurors is better than the single opinion of the judge since it willbe more likely to prevent the individual biases.
It can be totally independent because it is unaccountable.
Juries are barometers of public feeling on the state of law, e.g. by deliberately acquitting against the weight of the evidence to express disapproval of a ‘bad' or ‘unpopular' aw.
There is no satisfactory alternative to a lay jury.
The presence of the lay jury ensures that the proceedings are kept simple.

Should a juror make it through the selection procedure, despite "shortcomings" It is one voice among 12. A majority of 10 is acceptable in most circumstances. It is the averaging out of views that make the jury so important. A "bad apple" would also require a very strong personality to slew the proceedings. Under UK law no analysis of jury decision making is allowed, so the impact of one "stray Juror" is a total unknown. .

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 02:10 PM

The "selection procedure" in a Scottish court is so minimal it hardly merits the word. I've no idea what "voir dire" is, but we don't have it.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/scotland/law-and-courts/legal-system-s/taking-legal-action-s/jury-service-s/

You couldn't easily be ruled out by anything short of full-blown psychosis.

Fact-finding is a matter of common sense

Common sense is exactly what autistic people have problems with.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 02:32 PM

"Common sense is exactly what autistic people have problems with"

Found on a forum!
Define “common sense”. The funny thing about that is that it is rather a common observation that common sense is anything but common. Since the majority of people are NT, it follows that so-called “common sense” isn’t very common amongst NTs.(Neuro-typicals)

If you mean the daily rituals of “Good morning, how are you, I am fine” where just the right eye contact must be made or you’ll suffer the social consequences, that has always seemed illogical to me. Almost without exception, the person asking you how you are, does not want to know. You are supposed to say “Fine, how are you?” or be at risk of being labeled as an unfeeling jerk for not adequately pretending interest.

I know, because I used to think people really wanted to know if I was fine, so I’d tell them. Within a few sentences, the rolling eyes and trapped look start.

Is it the ability to figure out what someone means when they won’t say exactly what they mean? I certainly don’t have that. Sometimes I can tell when someone is being passive-aggressive, but I often can’t figure out what they really mean. I can often tell when someone is being disingenuous, because they will make incomplete answers that seem designed to mislead.

I do find that many NTs are passive-aggressive and disingenuous, so I guess that counts as common. But does that make sense?
To me, it is common sense that if you leave a refrigerator door open, overall the room warms up. It is common sense that any time it is cold enough that your furnace must run, there is no need to worry so much about turning off every light. To me, it is common sense that if a light switch starts making a spark bright enough to shine through the plastic and make an ozone smell, you TURN THE LIGHT OFF AND CALL SOMEONE IMMEDIATELY, not keep using it until it visibly melts.

To me, it is common sense to use your turn signal for EVERY turn and EVERY lane change, ESPECIALLY when you don’t see another vehicle. Common sense to allow people to merge into traffic even if it means they are now in front of you. Common sense at a four way stop not to try to rush through with the car in front of you. Common sense not to hit the gas to cut someone off when you see someone trying to change lanes.

Yet I’ve found that these things are quite uncommon in the general populous.

So, which areas of common sense would you like to discuss?

I am just playing Devil's Advocate here

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:11 PM

Jack seems to be against anyone with any varying degree of Aspergers serving on a jury.well his latest rant only confirms my poor opinion of a lot of his opinions, it is only a small step from that and he would be preventing people who have speech disorders or have a bad stutter.
Jack Campin ideas ar eof the kind that anyone who is not normal [if they exist] should not be allowed to serve on a jury, no left handers no people with speech impedimants nobody who is deaf and dumb, and so on.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:19 PM

I WOULD NOT WANT jACK ON ANY JURY OF MINE

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:34 PM

"Common sense" is embedded in Scottish civil law via the concept of "standard form" - the idea is that most commercial and interpersonal transactions follow standard patterns, and a contract (for example) assumes they will be followed unless the opposite is stated explicitly. Not sure how far criminal law does the same, but most systems seem to have the idea of what a "reasonable person" would think or do. Autistic people have a limited concept of this.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 03:58 PM

Referenced with no vetting, Scottish Jury which appears to be an essay from a book about legal issues from 1999. It says there is no voir dire such as we know it (selection of jurors).

There is a current American television series based on a highly paid expert who assists lawyers with jury selection as a means of controlling the trial mostly by defendants who can afford him. The show is called "Bull".

I've worked with someone who was clearly 'on the spectrum'. The person was extremely competent in a technical sense, utterly unemotional, and capable of dealing with other professionals, including freeing themselves from an onorous officemate. I'd probably welcome that person on a jury if I depended on someone interpreting fact from fiction.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 04:04 PM

I think in English Law the juror is defined as The man on the Clapham omnibus: It is not so much a case of common sense as reasonableness.

"The use of the phrase was reviewed by the UK Supreme Court in Healthcare at Home Limited v. The Common Services Agency, where Lord Reed said:

    1. The Clapham omnibus has many passengers. The most venerable is the reasonable man, who was born during the reign of Victoria but remains in vigorous health. Amongst the other passengers are the right-thinking member of society, familiar from the law of defamation, the officious bystander, the reasonable parent, the reasonable landlord, and the fair-minded and informed observer, all of whom have had season tickets for many years.

    2. The horse-drawn bus between Knightsbridge and Clapham, which Lord Bowen is thought to have had in mind, was real enough. But its most famous passenger, and the others I have mentioned, are legal fictions. They belong to an intellectual tradition of defining a legal standard by reference to a hypothetical person, which stretches back to the creation by Roman jurists of the figure of the bonus paterfamilias...

    3. It follows from the nature of the reasonable man, as a means of describing a standard applied by the court, that it would be misconceived for a party to seek to lead evidence from actual passengers on the Clapham omnibus as to how they would have acted in a given situation or what they would have foreseen, in order to establish how the reasonable man would have acted or what he would have foreseen. Even if the party offered to prove that his witnesses were reasonable men, the evidence would be beside the point. The behaviour of the reasonable man is not established by the evidence of witnesses, but by the application of a legal standard by the court. The court may require to be informed by evidence of circumstances which bear on its application of the standard of the reasonable man in any particular case; but it is then for the court to determine the outcome, in those circumstances, of applying that impersonal standard.

    4. In recent times, some additional passengers from the European Union have boarded the Clapham omnibus. This appeal is concerned with one of them: the reasonably well-informed and normally diligent tenderer."

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 04:42 PM

Jack, the "voir dire" is a phase in finalizing those from the wider jury pool who will be empaneled for the case; in US law it's a verbal exchange between an attorney for each side and each individual potential juror-- to ferret out prejudices, conflicts of interest, or other lack of fitness to serve on the particular case at hand. Each side can challenge (eliminate) potential jurors-- for demonstrated cause, plus a number of them just because it feels like a this or that potential juror will vote against your side ("peremptory challenge".)

~S~

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 06:49 PM

"Lawyer" - One skilled in circumventing the law.

                                  - Ambrose Bierce

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jun 18 - 10:02 PM

I admit I had not assumed Iains had so much common (informed) sense.
Although it is easy to do, Iains is smarter than me. But I still have a few unique tricks.

My son has autism in the sense he knew how to type in paragraphs at age two but did not speak until 6. Gregarious and out going, he is not on the Aspergers spectrum but he is linear.
He voiced a belief in Santa Claus at age 16 however he was continuing the pact of silence regarding Santa belief to maximize the the adult lie about thegift giving ceremony. He just beamed when I said "u know there is no Santa". Did he really believe in Santa at 16? I don't know.
Did he out do my Christmas spirit>

Yes.

A little cryptic, alot funny but the literal linear path is where you will find him. I've seen 100 people clutching their sides laughing at his genuine performance of Shel Silverstien. He is a central likable guy in a group, for his honesty and not for his coolness.
He is likely to believe a lie but not a Trump lie. So as a juror he will probably go with the most persuasive lawyer.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: leeneia
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 10:41 AM

A juror has to decide for himself, based on a witness's speech and body language, whether the witness is lying or not.

Can a person with Asperger's do that? I have my doubts.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: leeneia
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 10:44 AM

Another thought. Can a person with Asperger's tell if a lawyer is being tricky or not? Since 'tricky' is between true and not-true, can a person with Asperger's deal with it?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 11:04 AM

some people hear talk as if there were no degrees of aslergers, for example
Can a person with Asperger's tell if a lawyer is being tricky or not? Since 'tricky' is between true and not-true, can a person with Asperger's deal with it?
well there is mild aspergers and various other degrees of it, are jack campin and leenia experts?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 11:49 AM

Those that have a high degree of faith in body language and other such "subliminal clues" during conversation keep the noble art of the con artist alive and well and prospering.
Lie detectors ain't foolproof, neither is body language. Give me the traits of Mr Spock anyday. Facts and logic can defeat bullshit-most of the time.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 12:36 PM

I would be more concerned about the invisible manipulative evil of the social psychopath.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 01:34 PM

Would that be Hilary or Trump you are describing?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 06:38 PM

One of the tricky parts of this issue is that there is no 'Aspergers' as such. Each case is different hence in quoting the Wikipedia entry on Aspergers: In the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), published in May 2013,[26] AS, as a separate diagnosis, was eliminated and folded into autism spectrum disorder there are those who do not clinically define Aperger's anymore.

A good movie about an autistic is "Temple Grandin" starring Claire Danes. Temple Grandin's book: "Thinking in Pictures" is a great insightful read.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 21 Jun 18 - 07:13 PM

What is normal? Does it vary over time and is normality changed for some dependent on the phases of the moon and state of the tides?


https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/rethinking-mental-health/201111/what-do-we-mean-normal



https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2016263

Is anyone normal? Or does everyone have some sort of complex and does it wax and wane over time? To what extent do extremes of emotion diminish rational decisions?

I have come to the conclusion that to define sanity is a challenge that has yet to be answered to my satisfaction.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: leeneia
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 09:33 AM

In America, when you called for jury duty, you are asked if you can handle a trial emotionally. This is the point where an Asperger's person could say no.

Does this occur in other countries?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 09:58 AM

Just a thought Jack, if he person in question has conversed with you about the trial they are in breach of the equiette surrounding trials (they could even be prosecuted themselves)

So if you are really concerned about this perhaps notifying the relevant authority may be in order.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 11:45 AM

Always posting from the POV of the devil's defense lawyer is an academic hypothetical . The problem is a lot of people here only will see personal opinion . I used to do the same and it caused confusion to no end. Now I merely cause confusion ;^*



It is unlikely a single aspergers savant could throw an entire trial into chaos. The ultimate corrective tool would be to have the judge set the decision aside (nullify the jury's conclusion)

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 08:34 PM

Should people who masturbate be allowed to sit on juries?

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Mysha
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 09:34 PM

Well, I'm still not convinced that any of the deficiencies considered aren't more likely to be shown by allists, through their sheer numbers, than by autists.

But since leeneia asked:
A juror has to decide for himself, based on a witness's speech and "body language, whether the witness is lying or not.
Can a person with Asperger's do that?"

Obviously, where juries meet sworn-in witnesses, the need to determine whether or not the witness is telling the truth would demonstrate that the system doesn't work (any more). One could argue that that's even so where witnesses aren't sworn in.

But, let's cut this bit short: Aspergers aren't by definition less observant, nor less likely to draw conclusions from what they observe, when that is needed. But it doesn't matter whether a juror has that particular skill, as long as he is able to determine the truth. We see so many American TV/film where people are unable to determine untruth when a witness's words conflict known fact, that I wonder whether that's a true representation of reality or a sign of mediocre script-wrights.


And:
Can a person with Asperger's tell if a lawyer is being tricky or not? Since 'tricky' is between true and not-true, can a person with Asperger's deal with it?

To someone good with logic, tricky would probably stand out like a sore thumb, exactly because it isn't absolute. Even so, I doubt that it should be the task of the jury to correct the errors in the process; it probably would have to be up to the other barrister to makes certain that nobody gets away with yo or nes.


And also commented that:
In America, when you [are] called for jury duty, you are asked if you can handle a trial emotionally. This is the point where an Asperger's person could say no.

This is the point where any candidate juror could say "No". Even without the mistaken believe that autists have no emotions, why single out Aspergers here? I lean towards that escape route being more difficult for Aspergers than for allists, as most adult Aspergers I know hold the truth in high regard, thus they are unlikely to claim emotional problems when the issues broached above are about whether they have or lack certain skills. Allist appear more willing to use the approach that the lie would have the right effect, thus would seem more likely to lie about emotions to get out because they are unfit. But I don't know: If you know one allist, you know one allist; they are all deal with their handicap differently.

Bye,
                                                               Mysha

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Mysha
Date: 22 Jun 18 - 10:04 PM

Donuel,

If he's anything like an Asperger, he's playing along, and you won't get him to break the pact unless there's a good reason to. Putting him on the spot about it would not have been such a reason; it would just have been hard to evade.


In reality, it's Sinterklaas who brings the gifts, of course; any Dutch child could tell you that.

Bye
                                                             Mysha

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: robomatic
Date: 24 Jun 18 - 09:50 PM

When I'm online arranging for a seat in an airplane's emergency exit row, I'm asked by the program if I am willing and able to function with the window exit. Of course, this does not substitute for the in-your-face question that the cabin attendant will ask me. One wold hope that there is an analogous procedure for justice to be achieved in the various courts, be it peremptory challenge or a decision from the bench.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Jun 18 - 12:03 AM

I would hope people place emphasis on common decency rather than their own version of common sense.

I know Phd's who only think they are mechanicly gifted enough to operate an airplane emergency door but are not.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 25 Jun 18 - 02:56 AM

I know Phd's who only think they are mechanicly gifted enough to operate an airplane emergency door but are not"

I once worked in a unit where the door was opened by pushing in a steel disk. I watched three PhD's attempt an exit by rotating the disk.
One can draw various conclusions from this.
A PhD is an education to the point of stupidity.
Possession of a doctorate does not necessarily equate with common sense.

Or more logically. People with PhD's encompass a wide spectrum of abilities, just like those diagnosed with Aspergers.

Perhaps we should discuss if those blessed with red hair should be allowed to serve on juries, the viewpoint is equally nonsensical.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Jun 18 - 08:12 AM

Good post Iain and I have my own stories about educated idiots, on the other hand the PhD I knew best taught me to change flat tires as well as engine oil on 1950s era autos, did the plumbing repairs where possible at home, cleaned and dressed ingrown toenails better than the pediatrician and was able to correct my English teacher's poor interpretation of George Bernard Shaw.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 25 Jun 18 - 08:21 AM

Robomatic I have worked with highly skilled PhD's and others not so highly skilled. The same experience as anyone will have, in any walk of life.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Jun 18 - 08:53 AM

Stereotypes : A minimum of two different versions of the same thing.
Stereotype : An artificial example of a people, thing or place.

I think a stereotype is a handy concept for the unenlightened, uninformed and unintelligent.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jun 18 - 10:31 AM

some people hear talk as if there were no degrees of aslergers, for example

Of course there are degrees. The person I'm talking about is far over the edge of being able to understand the basics of how normal people interact. He would never be able to figure out what was going on in a con trick, and could well miscall whether consent was given in a rape case or what options were available to a victim of domestic violence.


if he person in question has conversed with you about the trial they are in breach of the equiette surrounding trials (they could even be prosecuted themselves)

All I know is that he's been off on jury service, and the length of time implies the case is major and complicated. I'm not intending to find out any more.


There is another issue that has been underlying part of this discussion - whether people can insist on their right to serve on a jury. I would say that anybody REALLY REALLY KEEN to be on a jury ought to be disqualified - chances are they have an agenda (either hang-'em-high or free-'em-all) and the evidence will be irrelevant to the verdict they want to give. No reason to suppose that autistic people will be any keener than others, though when they are the results might not be pretty. (Of course there isn't actually any mechanism to disqualify them, in Scotland or anywhere else).

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Jun 18 - 05:54 PM

"Of course there are degrees. The person I'm talking about is far over the edge of being able to understand the basics of how normal people interact. He would never be able to figure out what was going on in a con trick, and could well miscall whether consent was given in a rape case or what options were available to a victim of domestic violence."
Jack, are you a medical expert? if you are not please stop pontificating you remind me of the bar room know all ,

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: leeneia
Date: 27 Jun 18 - 11:08 AM

Speak for yourself, Sandman. I found Jack's remarks interesting. Jack seems to be the only person here who actually knows someone with Asperger's.

In a courtroom, the most important thing as that the accused get a fair trial. Another important thing is that the trial be valid - not have to be done all over. Having a juror who doesn't get what's going on might lead to that.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: Iains
Date: 27 Jun 18 - 11:12 AM

Jack seems to be the only person here who actually knows someone with Asperger's.

Nope. not true.

Subject: RE: Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)
From: ripov
Date: 28 Jun 18 - 08:32 PM

Am I the only one who gets a slight sense of incongruity when musicians discuss what "normal" people might do?