Ethics of Aspies on juries (Asperger's)

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 In the diagnostic system of mental conditions, Asperger’s syndrome no longer exists, having been replaced by ASD.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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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
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: 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.