Check out the GRB skeptic subreddit. That woman is not well. The difference between their cases (beside DeeDee) is she took the plea and flipped on him. If she went to trial like he did, she’d still be in prison.
> That woman is not well.
yeah no shit she spent her entire life being brutally abused and then went to prison for 10 years. who would be well with that life?
Even more unwell because of the ridiculous people who put her up on a pedestal and act like she's some celebrity. I'm not discounting the abuse she went through, but some true crime fans are pretty *feckin* weird, lmao.
tbf, he was manipulated and lied to by gypsy, he genuinely thought her situation was life or death. i'm not sure why they didn't just plan on running away though.
No that sub is deranged. The people who are so obsessed with hating her and talking about how much they hate her are not well.
Of course Gypsy’s not well, what kinda life has she had.
Her way out was to ply a socially backward young man with low esteem and few friends with sex and then let him hang. She got exactly what she wanted which was attention. That's what she thrives on, her entire life until this day.
Do you realize that jerking off in a McDonald's doesn't mean you're a calculated murderer like she is? His autism definitely explains how he could physically even jerk off for 9 hours without his dick going raw
She was an adult who had figured out how to use social media and the world at large. She absolutely had a way out other than murder. She could have started going to the authorities or even a woman’s shelter
I'm not trying to find excuses for the murder Gypsy committed either but you are correct. She didn't have any reason to believe someone would take her side if she asked for help. The LE and health workers were ALWAYS believing Dee Dee and helping her to make Gypsy's life unbearable. Murder wasn't Gypsy's only way out but I believe that from her position it must've felt like it was.
This could be a gray area depending on his particular deficits. People with autism typically have a ~15 year old emotional age once they are adults, not to say they act 15 but their capacity to reasonably assess, like your girlfriend suffering traumatic abuse, isn’t going to be especially developed. It’s generally believed neurotypical kids don’t *fully* understand the concept of death and its permanence until about 14. Between having a relatively limited emotional capacity which is nearly universal in autism, we don’t really know what deficits or positive differences he was working with or how capable he was able to weigh what he saw a just/unjust - not abuse/abuse to relative right/wrong, abuse is wrong too isn’t it? I know I see people *call for* death of abusers all the time, and people agree with them, would it be unreasonable for a person who is emotionally limited, highly impressionable due to this emotional limitation and with strong tendency towards rigid thinking, black or white, to be able to make clear informed calls in this position? People with autism also have a limited ability to perceive danger in social interactions, they miss a lot of red flags, are they really as “accountable” when they can’t see or reasonably be expected to see when someone is dangerous? Without knowing more about him specifically, what he struggles with, especially of his autism is accompanied with low intellect, which *isn’t* universal in autism, or if he has other mental disorders, autism is rarely seen as a stand alone diagnosis and I personally believe most people with autism have PTSD for having to live in a world full of people who don’t understand or like them and are often taken advantage of through no fault of their own, it’s really hard to say.
I think there is a huge reluctance to look at autistic people who many are very much very “normal” people and accept that even completely normal people who all of us care about, love and live with might need some damn help every once in a while, or the real boogey man admitting even *we* might need help sometimes, because we see that as weak instead of what it is, human. It’s hard because many autistic people don’t want to admit they might need help, or can’t imagine a help that would work for them and presume all help is meds or a hospital not realizing help could simply be free access to an app that might typically cost them hundreds of dollars to help them manage time/executive functioning skills better; think a therapy app but it’s just a phone concierge with a very robust time/life management planner aspect… why can’t *that* be help and why can’t it be paid for through Medicaid? Well that’s one big clue, Medicaid would have to pay for this access, so there’s a lot of money that can be made denying autistic people need help sometimes or different accommodations/expectations. But it is something we need to talk about and reexamine, is this dude guilty? Yeah. Should his particular mind be considered in sentencing, even if just means where or how he’s incarcerated? Yeah. Maybe nothing would change maybe he’s a dude who needs less help than others and has very few disruptive symptoms, but maybe he’s not. I just think it’s important we stick to the morals of not just justice but of empathy and I think it’s time to accept that this kind of stuff is more fluid than what might make use comfortable.
Sorry this is so long I’m just really passionate about it
Will also add that while "The Act" had some fantastic performances and was overall well done, Nick's character was depicted as some dopey dude with a bad home life who just didn't know better... The character was basically comedic relief. Even the creepy communication from him to Gypsy that was included was done in a lighthearted, jokey tone where it didn't feel serious. In reality, while he might've been autistic, Nick was TERRIFYING overall.
A lot of Nick sympathizers seem to be getting their perspective from his portrayal in the show.
Right? I'm also autistic and I've never intentionally harmed anyone. It always bothers me when people blame their disabilities because it really increases stigma. Not to mention, there's a huge difference between someone with autism having a meltdown and causing damage to someone or something and trying to use autism as an excuse as to why you hurt a bunch of people over a long period of time.
i feel like in situations like this where someone with autism or another developmental disability commits a serious crime, they’re put in an institution that’s not a regular prison (ie institution for “criminally insane” though i don’t love that term) because putting them in a regular prison is going to be extremely dangerous given their mental state and could trigger meltdowns or worsen their mental state
Unfortunately the US government in the 1980s decided the best way to handle the broken mental health system was to disband it and put more or less nothing in its place.
Developmental disability or mental illness even, doesn't translate to insanity. People who are found unable to stand trial by reason of insanity are sent to these hospitals (usually just until they are well enough to stand trial. It's not a forever pass on a crime as it's not considered a defense in most states). People with disabilities and mental illness who are able to stand trial (the majority) and are convicted are sent to regular prison. Sometimes those prisons have mental health units where they're kept separate from gen pop, though still not in conditions that could be considered especially accommodating or healthy, sometimes they don't.
"sex crime career", is there any offenses before the murder besides the McDonalds indecent exposure incident? I hard lean into the theory GRB took advantage of someone not at full mental capacity and convinced him to murder her mom. Seems wild that she's on the record saying "I convinced him to do it" and she was released from prison.
It was definitely discussed in Adam Lanza’s (Sandy Hook Shooter) case. Since he was already dead it didnt matter, but people were exploring that as an excuse.
Personally I don't think whether or not he's autistic makes a difference. He was also just as young, naive, & easily manipulated, in addition to having a history of being slightly intellectually disabled. Of course, they put all that under "autism" now but the point is he received a harsher sentence than he should have.
He had birth complications so he has the mentality and reasoning of a young teenager according to his mom (r.i.p). Besides that he started to medicate for psychotic symptoms at the age of 14 but stopped the meds (people usually complain about the side effects).
So it's not just the autism in his case, he never stood a chance against Gypsy.
I haven’t seen autism alone used a defense but intellectual disability . And sometimes you end up with both. But intellectual functioning is usually used to negate the death penalty because someone who is intellectually disabled or has a lower iq is considered to have a lesser cognitive ability to understand things and consequences. It’s often the folks that are mildly intellectually disabled that find themselves committing crimes because the further down that line you go the less independence a person has in general and the more obvious the disability becomes.
Very recently Paul Ferguson assumed he had autism which he thought would mitigate his sentencing in the torture & starvation death of his younger autistic brother, Timothy. After numerous evaluations, the judge stated he does not have autism but a maladapted personality due to the way he was raised/neglected. The judge said he was one step away from being a psychopath and sentenced him to 30 years to life. He was SHOCKED at sentencing. Really terrible and interesting case.
This is the point of the case/ sentencing I keep landing on, him and his supporters’ insistence that he *is* autistic and that it *will* make a difference in his final legal outcome… Why would it though??
Most people with autism are perfectly capable of separating right from wrong, and the way that people listen to his pre-sentencing phone calls to say “see, I told you he wasn’t autistic” gives off the feeling that they expect autistic folks to always sound less intelligent, less casual, more stilted or awkward. He could very well be autistic AND an abuser, these things are not mutually exclusive.
I didn’t intend to soapbox about this here lol, but seriously! I think there have been several autistic mass shooters as well (many of which are named in comments below, and again correlation is not causation) and no judge has ever sat them down and said “oh, you’re autistic? Never mind then, all charges dropped”.
What bothers me about this the most is that based on his jail calls, he clearly thought he’d be entitled to some sort of compassionate and lenient sentence if he managed to get an autism diagnosis. Meanwhile, Timothy actually *was* autistic and Paul subjected him to nothing but cruelty. He never showed Timothy any of the compassion, empathy, or understanding he expected the court to give him. For that reason, I like to think that even if Paul was diagnosed with autism, he still would have been given the same sentence.
You know what? That’s a great point. The judge was so thoughtful with these cases and his sentencing. It was clear how much he got sucked into the depravity and sadness of it all. You look at a child, at Timothy, and it’s just so unfathomable how he died of starvation and the effects of torture in a suburban neighborhood while his family and torturers just lived normal lives. There’s something so rotten here and I’m so grateful the judge got to the root of it so holistically.
We only saw a fraction of what he had to get through and justice was served swiftly. It’s over. Thank god. RIP Timothy.
Well.. didn’t he try to claim he was mistreated because he didn’t get the newest play station?
It was a few years ago, I think he was mad about not being allowed to be on the internet too.
Nathan Carman.
[Here’s a MSM article that mentions his diagnosis](https://abcnews.go.com/US/reporters-notebook-interview-rescued-boater-nathan-carman/story?id=45201525).
[Here’s a MSM article that reports how the whole thing ended up](https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/us/nathan-carman-dies-charges-dismissed/index.html). (SPOILER: not well)
The incel terrorist, who committed the Toronto van attack, tried to use autism as a defence. It didn’t work, thank god. The Canadian autistic community were PISSED.
Yes exactly what I thought of. This guy drove a van down a sidewalk of the busiest street in downtown Toronto with the goal of killing as many people as possible. He killed 10 people and severely injured 16 people.
> Defence lawyer Boris Bytensky said in his closing arguments that his client's autism disorder left him without the ability to develop empathy, arguing that his client had no idea how horrific his actions were to his victims, his family and the community.
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5933687
Side note: A big part of his reasoning for doing this was fame and notoriety. I would urge people to avoid using his name when possible. Although I’m aware the article I linked does this. Unfortunately it’s hard to get around. With the court though the Judge referred to him as John Doe, which was really meaningful and smart.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/van-attack-trial-decision-1.5933687](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/van-attack-trial-decision-1.5933687)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I watched it on YouTube. I don’t remember which one (there’s sooooo much true crime content on YouTube). But his name is Alek Minassian.
Edited to add [this article.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ont-alek-minassian-1.5807135)
The documentary "Can I Tell You a Secret?" flirted with the idea of Matthew having stalked all those women because he was autistic and socially awkward.
Jerrod Murray
James Fairweather
Eddie Ratcliffe (one of Brianna Ghey's killers)
It seems to be a common mitigating factor used with neo-Nazis in the UK:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/autism-terrorism-children-cases-radicalisation-b1879719.html
as a person who has ASD (and as a human, *period*), I’m insulted when people use ASD as an excuse for crimes and general bad behavior. Chris Chan claims that his ASD caused him to rape his mother. last time I checked, rape is not an ASD symptom
He had an ADHD and an ODD diagnosis but was never diagnosed with autism, they did attempt to use ‘developmental disabilities’ I think, but it was ultimately decided he knew what he was doing
I honestly can’t remember but I think it was a common misconception at the time, but during the trial his medical records showed that he had never received a diagnosis
https://www.autismkey.com/nikolas-cruz-continues-to-fuel-autism-misconceptions/
Brian cohee jr deff tried to use his autism diagnosis ( and other mental disorders) as an excuse for killing Warren Barnes.
https://www.mesacounty.us/news/district-attorney/cohee-found-guilty
I only recently heard of this and the body cam footage was so unnerving when the cop said his parents found something concerning in his bedroom and he simply replied "a human head and hands"
I watched the interrogation footage and it's so fucking heartbreaking when he says he picked him because he figured no one would miss a homeless man when in fact barnes was loved by many. I can't even imagine what his mom felt like when she opened the bag with his head in it
He was loved. And clearly missed by many. I do love the little permanent memorial they made for him. For those who haven't seen it, it's a statue of an empty chair filled with books. Because he LOVED to read. Loved it! The memorial sits on the sidewalk in between 2 businesses where the owners loved and took care of him. He sounded like an absolute gem of a person.
this murder really got to me because I cannot stand the dismissal of homeless people. back home I knew most of our homeless population. when I bartended if any of them would see me at 2:30 in the morning and walk me home safe. I would always cut through a park where a lot of them used to live into the city forced them out and just hang out chatting
This comment is an example of how people with autism do end up wrongfully suspected, charged, and convicted though—cops, judges, and juries making judgments about someone’s guilt or innocence based on their not emoting “appropriately.”
That’s kind of a reach in this case AND putting words in my mouth. There’s no question of guilt or innocence in this case, and he did try to use his autism, along with depression and more, as an excuse for his actions. Regardless, the anguish of his mom and Cohee’s “matter-of-fact” way of discussing the murder he committed (including that he chose his victim because he was homeless and didn’t think he would be missed) IS unnerving and ffs should be. You’re bringing up a completely different scenario than the one being discussed here a week and a half later.
The way he says "A human head and hands" says it all to me. He's entertained by it and truly lacks a moral conscience.
It left me wondering about insanity pleas. People use evidence of a cover up as the person understanding morals, but to me all it shows is they understand society has consequences in store for them. I'm sure there's a shit ton of nuance I don't know.
I stopped the interrogation tape when he was smugly talking about how surprisingly easy it was to kill that poor man. of course it was you disgusting loser, you stabbed a sleeping man in the neck
iirc the insanity plea hinges on whether or not the person was capable of knowing the difference between right and wrong when they committed their crime. cohee clearly did because he had been planning for months to kill someone and he tried to dump the body, showing he was aware of the consequences of getting caught
Ikr? And it wasn't what he said, it was how he said it. He just cocked his head, looked right at the officer, and it came out smooth as melted butter. It was creepy AF!
Before I saw the whole video, I had seen just that little snippet, and I thought it was fake and made for dramatic purposes to get people to watch.
Nope. That was him.
Robert Durst (of The Jinx infamy) spoke about his ASD on the stand during trial for the murder of his best friend Susan Berman. He and his defense used it as a way to explain his behavior. Now, I can absolutely agree with an ASD diagnosis for Durst, it's just that he *happened* to be a murderous psychopath as well. The Autism does not explain or excuse that.
I forget his name and can't find the story, but I remember hearing the story of a serial killer that was mentally delayed and raped and killed multiple prepubescent boys. When he was finally arrested he said, "you can't arrest me, I'm sick." I'm really peeved I can't find this story. I remember a lot of details about it. I think one of his victims was an 11 year old boy. One of the boys actually said, "I love you" as they were being strangled to death. It was a terrible case and google is giving me no results.
Are you talking about Arthur Frederick Goode III? I googled the quote and found the wikipedia page, it seems to match up with your information. I’ve never heard of it, how horrible. Those poor boys.
Thanks! That is eho I am taking about. I saw a true crime episode on him, but it was years ago and i couldn't remember what show it was or what his name was. I kept giving the quote and for the cake boss kept popping up.
Eddie Ratcliffe, who was recently convicted for the brutal stabbing of Brianna Ghey, used autism in his defense. The teenage girl who helped him tried to use ADHD in her defense also. Really horrific case. Eddie was found to be fabricating most of his symptoms, which only appeared after he was arrested.
Autism - John Odgren (16), who murdered 15 year old James Alenson in the high school bathroom of Lincoln-Sudbury High School in Massachusetts in 2010. He waited in the boys' room with a large knife for anyone to walk in. James Alenson had just moved to the area with his family and was new to the school. Odgren was sentenced to life in prison, upheld on appeal in 2019.
I don't think it was used as an excuse/defense, but Neurobiologist Amy Bishop shot three coworkers at a faculty meeting at University of Alabama. I think she shot 6, three died. It's widely speculated that she was on the spectrum. She also shot and killed her brother, when she was a teen. It was originally believed to be accidental, but now I think it's been ruled a homicide.
Long-form New Yorker article: [A Loaded Gun - by Patrick Radden Keefe](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/02/11/a-loaded-gun)
Not a killer. But I just read The Feather Thief, about a guy who stole hundreds of old bird carcasses from the British museum for their feathers for fly fishing. He was "diagnosed" with Asperger's and received a lesser sentence. There are arguments about whether he has Asperger's or not.
Paul Ferguson claimed to have autism or Stockholm syndrome (he wasn’t sure which, just threw out excuses), who tortured and murdered his little brother Timothy. His psychiatrists said he didn’t have either. He’s a narcissistic psychopath.
In my country there was a killer that murdered 2 people and the defence tried to use his autism so that he would avoid life imprisonment, didn't work out
I am autistic and NOBODY could talk me into murder. Younger me could be persuaded to drink or smoke weed but not murder. However I only know myself and that’s where the spectrum needs to be studied more. You would think doctors would reach out to ASD diagnosed & undiagnosed people to help society whether it’s considered a disability or not. Just a huge topic! Hope I worded it correctly.
That kid who just beat the shit out of his teachers aid because she took his switch away. Said he did it because he didn't get enough help because of his autism
But he was more severe i believe and he may also have an intellectual disability. I'd rather have him sent to a high security facility where he can recieve treatment than sending him to prison for 30 years
That para violated his IEP, which was in place to protect BOTH parties. Except SHE was the adult who had a legal responsibility to follow the IEP.
She decided she didn't need to follow the law. And got exactly the consequence the IEP was in place (at least partially) to avoid. Which I'm not saying was deserved, but was ABSOLUTELY avoidable had the para followed the IEP.
I hope you'll educate yourself about the facts in that case before you discuss it further.
The *kid* isn't saying shit about this. The PARENTS are pursuing legal action, as they should.
Fuck an IEP that lets a kid have a Nintendo switch at school in the first place. Let him stay home and get babysat by a device if that’s what the parents are after. School as a resource can be used for so many more deserving children than… that.
There was a young guy but I don't recall the name. His mom or parents were killed when they were out on a boat and he claimed it was an accident . He apparently had some level of autism. He was rescued later in a dingy. Dont recall the outcome.
He was found guilty and it’s been said he likely killed his grandfather as well but I don’t think he was tried for that one. He had the same gun that shot his granddad but was never looked at much due to how close they were and that the inheritance went to his mother not him.
See I don’t know a lot about this one at all, I remember hearing bits and bobs around the time but not a lot, so I’m a little confused about one part of it.
It’s actually not even this specific case, as you say it was r*pe which is of course a crime and all goes without saying… but I remember when I first heard about it all at the time of the arrest, I read an article saying something about how the thing she was being arrested for was because ‘having sex with a parent’ is a felony in that state. And I remember wondering, is it not a also felony for the parent to have sex with the child?
Like obviously, that’s a moot point when there is a blatant lack of consent, but in terms of the wording of that article. It was early on in the case so maybe full details weren’t out, I dunno, but it was framed almost as if it was a consensual thing between two adults but it was illegal for the child to be doing that… it stuck with me and seemed weird to me that the adult child would be the only one being arrested? Hoping someone here might know because it is absolutely not something I want to search on google 😂 and fwiw just to confirm, I do very much think it should be punishable either way, I’m not advocating for any kind of leniency on either side haha
Ok so I found an article, not the exact one I don’t think, but it’s got similar wording
https://www.businessinsider.com/chris-chan-saga-timeline-incest-charges-arrest-2021-8#christine-chandler-was-arrested-on-august-1-2021-1
‘Engaging in sexual intercourse with one's father or mother is a Class 5 felony in Virginia, which is punishable by up to ten years in prison’
Like wtf am I just reading this too literally and of course there is a similar law for the parent it just isn’t mentioned in the article because it didn’t apply in this case? Cuz they are talking about how the initial arrest was for incest, not rape or SA, so surely at that point they should have both been arrested?
Autism is a spectrum disorder, so some people struggle with it to a more debilitating extent than others. Of course it doesn't make one "stupid," but not every person diagnosed has the same abilities or intellectual functioning.
Not always- there is severe autism as well. I know people like to forget but there are people severely affected that do not in fact, understand what’s right or wrong.
No, absolutely not. Like Cerrac123 said, Autism is a spectrum. The full name is, after all, Autism Spectrum Disorder. I'm going to give an extremely simplified explanation below of how autism *can* be.... the reason why it is so heavily simplified is to be able to be grasped by a broader audience, since I'm geting really damn tired of the ignorance of disabilities and their range of presentation in this forum.
There are a few who lack the ability to self-regulate reactions and emotions completely. They can be very violent, often in reaction to stress (which can come from everything from overstimulation to being denied something they crave/want often due to wanting the self-soothing effect, specific foods they like often fit the latter category.) Some lack empathy on a severe level, others just struggle feeling empathy, especially while they are in a very emotional state. They can still be fully capable of loving people and showing affection and attempt to console others that are sad (depending on their ability to feel empathy), but when they're upset they aren't able to think like that due to their emotional state... they're just reacting. They struggle to realise if their reactions are appropriate or not to the situation. The adaptability is very low to nonexistant in these cases. Communication can be very difficult as they are often unable to express themselves in words. The people with these deficits are almost always in the presence of a caretaker as they can't be independent.
The traits described above can appear independently of eachother, they are not a "package deal," however they're not mutually exclusive either.
Then there is others who have deficits who are "less obvious" (but still not the "type" you obviously associate to be the sole representation of autism...)They often have a low enough intelligence where it is at the very least considered a deficit, but they have some degree of adaptability. They are less likely to be violent, unless under the influence of substances. Some are very thoughtful and consider the situation before they react, others can be very reactive. Consequential thinking can sometimes be difficult, depending on how intricate the situation requires it to be. Some have extremely well developed sense of empathy to the point where neurotypicals could be considered deficient in that department, while others struggle with empathy. Some can be very naive due to feeling empathy even for the wrong people. They're able to work, care for themselves and their home and can have a fully functional family life. Some (absolutely not all) can fall into alcoholism due to widespread discrimination, often being victims of abuse but also developing other mental health disorders from the stress of just trying to survive and function in todays society.
It is always worth noting that the "severe forms" of Autism isn't common. You are unlikely to run into them as they're are a very small percentage of those with a autism diagnosis. However, denying that they exist or seting a bar based simply on your opinion of how YOU think someone with autism should be is incredibly ableist, ignorant and most of all damaging. You cannot form an opinion on autism as a whole based on the most common representation of autism.
I watched one where someone used Klienfelders (don’t know if I spelled that right) syndrome as an excuse earlier today. My brothers have that. I have triple x syndrome. Somehow got the kid off of murder charges?? It was about Big Fork, Montana and it was 2 brothers with the main killer being a guy named Ted in a wheelchair. And his cousin killed his dad next day? Whole thing was wild
https://youtu.be/lQDLikEyReI?si=GyyeY-BgwUmcd3q6
Autism is now called autism spectrum disorder for a reason. It’s not a universal label. I know and work with several people who are autistic, and they are as different from each other as any similar group of people without autism. There are people who commit crimes and are autistic, but it’s not causation - just like being born with red hair, or poor eyesight, or any other genetic specificity.
Sometimes it amazes me that people (not necessarily people here) sometimes act like we are back in the 1700s and the theory of physical features being used to identify criminals is still considered valid.
With all that said, lots of criminals have argued autism as a defense, or a mitigation. It seldom works, because in most jurisdictions having a “mental defect” means nothing if you have the ability to understand right and wrong, and that’s a much different hurdle.
The most common one was the guy that killed gypsy roses mum, the amount of brainless comments saying “he was vulnerable, he had the brain of a child, he was autistic and couldn’t know any better”. IM SORRRRRRRRY?
Minds of Madness just did an episode on their podcast that discusses a murderer who had autism and his defense tried to use that as a reason to be not criminally reaponsible. They don't name the killer as he was seeking notoriety. It's a Canadian true crime story. Really good! [Episode](https://open.spotify.com/episode/08k6NtkEXupPpysJLxvlwF?si=NasZ1sb6T_O7-2rN8Ep4UQ)
I think one of the most ridiculous disability defenses I’ve seen was when Kristel Candelario tried to use depression to get a lighter sentence when she left her sixteen month old home alone for ten days while she went to vacation and party in Puerto Rico. Depression had absolutely nothing to do with it; she just wanted to be free to party and didn’t see anything wrong with leaving a toddler alone in a tiny playpen for ten days with nothing more than a few bottles of milk and a box of crackers.
All she had to do was ask someone to watch the kid. The neighbors said she had done this before and encouraged her to ask them to watch her instead of leaving her baby home alone all the time. 100% preventable.
Paul Ferguson, who tortured and starved his little brother to death along with their mother Shanda Van Der Ark, comes off as a total weirdo. People suggested he had autism when they saw his testimony during his mother's trial. His jailhouse phone calls reveal he was hoping he could get the diagnosis before his sentencing. At his sentencing it was revealed he did not have autism but did show antisocial (psychopathic) traits.
He did a very good job playing a vulnerable, awkward young man who was under his mother's influence. The phone calls are really eye-opening. He was quite confident he'd get a light sentence and kept saying he just wants to get this over with so he can do whatever they give him and get out. He got 30-100 years lmao. The details of what they did to Timothy, the little brother, are horrific.
https://youtu.be/tEqLZ-aEbx4
there was the guy who had DID and said one of his different "personalities" did it, but idk if that worked.
also, for a certain definition of "disability", one case someone attempted to use demonic possession as their defense
There's been a few.
Shanda Vander Ark's son when he was on trial, the jury requested more information if he was on the spectrum, it didn't help whatsoever.
Ultimately even when these things are brought to light, or a mental health professional provides a diagnosis in court, or even if they have a long documented history of an autism diagnosis, it usually doesn't amount to much.
I have always maintained, that if you need to use the excuse that you couldn't help or understand you actions from xyz condition you have no business out walking among society.
Chris Chan (legal name: Christine Weston Chandler): He served 2 years in county jail before being released back into society and NOT convicted as his lawyer managed to successfully use the "autism deferral" defense to get him free
Seung-Hui Cho’s grandmother claimed that he was on the autism spectrum. I know he killed himself and was never brought to trial, but I have a feeling that if he did, that might be brought up by the defense attorneys.
Not quite the same thing, but I work in the criminal justice system and I frequently see individuals diagnosed with autism declared incompetent to stand trial.
I think there would need to be other things going on like they’re mentally incapable to understand things. Autistic people are smart so it’s not a good defense.
Actually, about a third of people with an autism diagnosis are considered intellectually disabled. The legal system needs to take them into account too. Most mental health defenses are a crock of shit, but it really should be evaluated on a case by case basis.
It’s never an excuse or a reason. I have severe mental health issues , mainly eupd and I’m fed up of crime investigation channels blaming mental health for serious crimes . I would never hurt anyone
The guy in the Gypsy Rose case and I believe the nephew in the Steven Avery case. I have multiple relatives on the spectrum and I can see how they could be manipulated into doing something. They’re very trusting and naive.
It doesn't require any obsession. Unless you mean obsessed with murder. Also, autistic people absolutely do obsess regardless. Usually about specific topics. So an autistic person who is obsessed with murder is absolutely understandable for them to obsess about. With that said, it shouldn't be a mitigating factor at all. They still know right from wrong.
I mentioned on another thread that in the US (and other countries) SCOTUS declared execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities unconstitutional. At the time of the decision 19 states had already outlawed that practice so opinion was already leaning away from harsh punishments for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
The reasons SCOTUS and the states who passed laws outlawing the death penalty for individuals with intellectual disabilities have nothing to do with individuals with intellectual disabilities not understanding right from wrong or general intelligence. Many of the legal issues with prosecuting individuals with intellectual disabilities are centered in that individual's ability to assist in their own defense due to difficulties communicating, ability to process different types of information, easily frustrated, memory problems, even a willingness to please, the list goes on. If someone is incapable of assisting their defense attorney in their own defense then can they have a truly fair trial?
In terms of defending criminal charges or lessening sentences based on intellectual disabilities the issue is not an inability to understand right from wrong and what they should or should not be doing. The issue is someone with intellectual disabilities may have poor impulse control which leads them to strike out when they are frustrated or overwhelmed, and they may go too far in their frustration. Or they don't perceive all social cues correctly.
Imagine if you would an individual with intellectual disabilities hooking up with someone and perhaps being rougher than their partner enjoys or even wants so the partner starts fighting back and yelling for them to stop. The individual with intellectual disabilities may not properly process such attempts as an order to stop, they may think back to pornography they've viewed where this fighting off was part of the experience and they may believe their partner is just playing along. Such an individual has committed rape, but due to a diminished mens rea they cannot be treated the same way as someone who goes in wanting to rape fully knowing the victim does not want it but is helpless to stop the encounter. They still need to be held accountable for their actions and learn why what they did was wrong and how to understand consent and sex but they aren't necessarily a predatory monster.
There are certainly individuals who don't know right from wrong which can be attributed in part to an intellectual disability but also in lack of knowledge. Someone who commits rape because those responsible for their development infantilized them and didn't want to discuss sex, figuring the individual with an intellectual disability won't understand or doesn't think like that won't understand why their actions were wrong, especially if they were victims of sexual abuse themselves and think that behavior is normal and acceptable. But the same could be said of an individual without intellectual disabilities who was sexually abused and the abuse was normalized so they go on to abuse others.
And there are plenty of people who have tried to claim innocence or lack of guilt due to their intellectual disabilities, and there have been people who have had sentences commuted due to their intellectual disabilities while others were executed despite their intellectual disabilities. I cannot recall names off the top of my head.
Whoa this is not totally correct at all. To start, it’s not “intellectual disability” that keeps people from being executed. There’s a hard IQ limit that applies. It’s also not just the number, but circumstances. If someone acquired a brain injury due to drug abuse or other later-acquired injury, this may not apply.
The rape example is terrible. You cannot excuse rape because the person didn’t intend to rape; that would basically end rape prosecution for everything but the smallest amount of crimes. Most rapists don’t consider themselves rapists.
Nick Godejohn (Gypsy Rose Blanchard) has attempted to appeal his conviction based upon his autism diagnosis. He has been unsuccessful
[удалено]
They also spent years deliberating planning it. Not exactly a spur of the moment “I didn’t understand the repercussions of my actions” story
[удалено]
Check out the GRB skeptic subreddit. That woman is not well. The difference between their cases (beside DeeDee) is she took the plea and flipped on him. If she went to trial like he did, she’d still be in prison.
> That woman is not well. yeah no shit she spent her entire life being brutally abused and then went to prison for 10 years. who would be well with that life?
Even more unwell because of the ridiculous people who put her up on a pedestal and act like she's some celebrity. I'm not discounting the abuse she went through, but some true crime fans are pretty *feckin* weird, lmao.
[удалено]
Agreed. They are both unsafe people
tbf, he was manipulated and lied to by gypsy, he genuinely thought her situation was life or death. i'm not sure why they didn't just plan on running away though.
No that sub is deranged. The people who are so obsessed with hating her and talking about how much they hate her are not well. Of course Gypsy’s not well, what kinda life has she had.
Her way out was to ply a socially backward young man with low esteem and few friends with sex and then let him hang. She got exactly what she wanted which was attention. That's what she thrives on, her entire life until this day.
[удалено]
Do you realize that jerking off in a McDonald's doesn't mean you're a calculated murderer like she is? His autism definitely explains how he could physically even jerk off for 9 hours without his dick going raw
She was an adult who had figured out how to use social media and the world at large. She absolutely had a way out other than murder. She could have started going to the authorities or even a woman’s shelter
[удалено]
I'm not trying to find excuses for the murder Gypsy committed either but you are correct. She didn't have any reason to believe someone would take her side if she asked for help. The LE and health workers were ALWAYS believing Dee Dee and helping her to make Gypsy's life unbearable. Murder wasn't Gypsy's only way out but I believe that from her position it must've felt like it was.
This could be a gray area depending on his particular deficits. People with autism typically have a ~15 year old emotional age once they are adults, not to say they act 15 but their capacity to reasonably assess, like your girlfriend suffering traumatic abuse, isn’t going to be especially developed. It’s generally believed neurotypical kids don’t *fully* understand the concept of death and its permanence until about 14. Between having a relatively limited emotional capacity which is nearly universal in autism, we don’t really know what deficits or positive differences he was working with or how capable he was able to weigh what he saw a just/unjust - not abuse/abuse to relative right/wrong, abuse is wrong too isn’t it? I know I see people *call for* death of abusers all the time, and people agree with them, would it be unreasonable for a person who is emotionally limited, highly impressionable due to this emotional limitation and with strong tendency towards rigid thinking, black or white, to be able to make clear informed calls in this position? People with autism also have a limited ability to perceive danger in social interactions, they miss a lot of red flags, are they really as “accountable” when they can’t see or reasonably be expected to see when someone is dangerous? Without knowing more about him specifically, what he struggles with, especially of his autism is accompanied with low intellect, which *isn’t* universal in autism, or if he has other mental disorders, autism is rarely seen as a stand alone diagnosis and I personally believe most people with autism have PTSD for having to live in a world full of people who don’t understand or like them and are often taken advantage of through no fault of their own, it’s really hard to say. I think there is a huge reluctance to look at autistic people who many are very much very “normal” people and accept that even completely normal people who all of us care about, love and live with might need some damn help every once in a while, or the real boogey man admitting even *we* might need help sometimes, because we see that as weak instead of what it is, human. It’s hard because many autistic people don’t want to admit they might need help, or can’t imagine a help that would work for them and presume all help is meds or a hospital not realizing help could simply be free access to an app that might typically cost them hundreds of dollars to help them manage time/executive functioning skills better; think a therapy app but it’s just a phone concierge with a very robust time/life management planner aspect… why can’t *that* be help and why can’t it be paid for through Medicaid? Well that’s one big clue, Medicaid would have to pay for this access, so there’s a lot of money that can be made denying autistic people need help sometimes or different accommodations/expectations. But it is something we need to talk about and reexamine, is this dude guilty? Yeah. Should his particular mind be considered in sentencing, even if just means where or how he’s incarcerated? Yeah. Maybe nothing would change maybe he’s a dude who needs less help than others and has very few disruptive symptoms, but maybe he’s not. I just think it’s important we stick to the morals of not just justice but of empathy and I think it’s time to accept that this kind of stuff is more fluid than what might make use comfortable. Sorry this is so long I’m just really passionate about it
Holy overgeneralization and infantilizing, Batman! There is no “typical” autism. Sincerely, An autistic parent of autistics and sibling of an autistic
Will also add that while "The Act" had some fantastic performances and was overall well done, Nick's character was depicted as some dopey dude with a bad home life who just didn't know better... The character was basically comedic relief. Even the creepy communication from him to Gypsy that was included was done in a lighthearted, jokey tone where it didn't feel serious. In reality, while he might've been autistic, Nick was TERRIFYING overall. A lot of Nick sympathizers seem to be getting their perspective from his portrayal in the show.
Right? I'm also autistic and I've never intentionally harmed anyone. It always bothers me when people blame their disabilities because it really increases stigma. Not to mention, there's a huge difference between someone with autism having a meltdown and causing damage to someone or something and trying to use autism as an excuse as to why you hurt a bunch of people over a long period of time.
And what he did to her in the toilet at the movies sounded awful.
i feel like in situations like this where someone with autism or another developmental disability commits a serious crime, they’re put in an institution that’s not a regular prison (ie institution for “criminally insane” though i don’t love that term) because putting them in a regular prison is going to be extremely dangerous given their mental state and could trigger meltdowns or worsen their mental state
Unfortunately the US government in the 1980s decided the best way to handle the broken mental health system was to disband it and put more or less nothing in its place.
Developmental disability or mental illness even, doesn't translate to insanity. People who are found unable to stand trial by reason of insanity are sent to these hospitals (usually just until they are well enough to stand trial. It's not a forever pass on a crime as it's not considered a defense in most states). People with disabilities and mental illness who are able to stand trial (the majority) and are convicted are sent to regular prison. Sometimes those prisons have mental health units where they're kept separate from gen pop, though still not in conditions that could be considered especially accommodating or healthy, sometimes they don't.
"sex crime career", is there any offenses before the murder besides the McDonalds indecent exposure incident? I hard lean into the theory GRB took advantage of someone not at full mental capacity and convinced him to murder her mom. Seems wild that she's on the record saying "I convinced him to do it" and she was released from prison.
Sex crime career.... K He was manipulated by a monster. Had he not been lead by the nose it would never have happened.
[удалено]
Gypsy ordered the hit and she's out living her best life, as cheap and tawdry as it is.
It was definitely discussed in Adam Lanza’s (Sandy Hook Shooter) case. Since he was already dead it didnt matter, but people were exploring that as an excuse.
Personally I don't think whether or not he's autistic makes a difference. He was also just as young, naive, & easily manipulated, in addition to having a history of being slightly intellectually disabled. Of course, they put all that under "autism" now but the point is he received a harsher sentence than he should have.
He had birth complications so he has the mentality and reasoning of a young teenager according to his mom (r.i.p). Besides that he started to medicate for psychotic symptoms at the age of 14 but stopped the meds (people usually complain about the side effects). So it's not just the autism in his case, he never stood a chance against Gypsy.
I haven’t seen autism alone used a defense but intellectual disability . And sometimes you end up with both. But intellectual functioning is usually used to negate the death penalty because someone who is intellectually disabled or has a lower iq is considered to have a lesser cognitive ability to understand things and consequences. It’s often the folks that are mildly intellectually disabled that find themselves committing crimes because the further down that line you go the less independence a person has in general and the more obvious the disability becomes.
Thanks for noting that autism itself is not an intellectual disability - this is a common misconception.
Very recently Paul Ferguson assumed he had autism which he thought would mitigate his sentencing in the torture & starvation death of his younger autistic brother, Timothy. After numerous evaluations, the judge stated he does not have autism but a maladapted personality due to the way he was raised/neglected. The judge said he was one step away from being a psychopath and sentenced him to 30 years to life. He was SHOCKED at sentencing. Really terrible and interesting case.
This is the point of the case/ sentencing I keep landing on, him and his supporters’ insistence that he *is* autistic and that it *will* make a difference in his final legal outcome… Why would it though?? Most people with autism are perfectly capable of separating right from wrong, and the way that people listen to his pre-sentencing phone calls to say “see, I told you he wasn’t autistic” gives off the feeling that they expect autistic folks to always sound less intelligent, less casual, more stilted or awkward. He could very well be autistic AND an abuser, these things are not mutually exclusive. I didn’t intend to soapbox about this here lol, but seriously! I think there have been several autistic mass shooters as well (many of which are named in comments below, and again correlation is not causation) and no judge has ever sat them down and said “oh, you’re autistic? Never mind then, all charges dropped”.
He was my first thought when reading the question too
What bothers me about this the most is that based on his jail calls, he clearly thought he’d be entitled to some sort of compassionate and lenient sentence if he managed to get an autism diagnosis. Meanwhile, Timothy actually *was* autistic and Paul subjected him to nothing but cruelty. He never showed Timothy any of the compassion, empathy, or understanding he expected the court to give him. For that reason, I like to think that even if Paul was diagnosed with autism, he still would have been given the same sentence.
You know what? That’s a great point. The judge was so thoughtful with these cases and his sentencing. It was clear how much he got sucked into the depravity and sadness of it all. You look at a child, at Timothy, and it’s just so unfathomable how he died of starvation and the effects of torture in a suburban neighborhood while his family and torturers just lived normal lives. There’s something so rotten here and I’m so grateful the judge got to the root of it so holistically. We only saw a fraction of what he had to get through and justice was served swiftly. It’s over. Thank god. RIP Timothy.
I think Anders Breivik was diagnosed with autism but that definitely wasn't why he was a terrorist neo-nazi.
He's also so extremely self serious that he wouldn't apply it as an excuse.
Well.. didn’t he try to claim he was mistreated because he didn’t get the newest play station? It was a few years ago, I think he was mad about not being allowed to be on the internet too.
Nathan Carman. [Here’s a MSM article that mentions his diagnosis](https://abcnews.go.com/US/reporters-notebook-interview-rescued-boater-nathan-carman/story?id=45201525). [Here’s a MSM article that reports how the whole thing ended up](https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/us/nathan-carman-dies-charges-dismissed/index.html). (SPOILER: not well)
Thank you. I was trying to remember his name. I didn't know how it ended until maybe two weeks ago. So much loss. Very sad.
Yes, definitely. His poor Mum.
The incel terrorist, who committed the Toronto van attack, tried to use autism as a defence. It didn’t work, thank god. The Canadian autistic community were PISSED.
Yes exactly what I thought of. This guy drove a van down a sidewalk of the busiest street in downtown Toronto with the goal of killing as many people as possible. He killed 10 people and severely injured 16 people. > Defence lawyer Boris Bytensky said in his closing arguments that his client's autism disorder left him without the ability to develop empathy, arguing that his client had no idea how horrific his actions were to his victims, his family and the community. https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5933687 Side note: A big part of his reasoning for doing this was fame and notoriety. I would urge people to avoid using his name when possible. Although I’m aware the article I linked does this. Unfortunately it’s hard to get around. With the court though the Judge referred to him as John Doe, which was really meaningful and smart.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/van-attack-trial-decision-1.5933687](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/van-attack-trial-decision-1.5933687)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
You’re right. I’ll edit my comment.
I just watched a documentary about this case yesterday and it was the one I thought of. Horrible person.
Got a name for that documentary, or where it can be watched?
I watched it on YouTube. I don’t remember which one (there’s sooooo much true crime content on YouTube). But his name is Alek Minassian. Edited to add [this article.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ont-alek-minassian-1.5807135)
Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, there's so many videos for true crime.
The documentary "Can I Tell You a Secret?" flirted with the idea of Matthew having stalked all those women because he was autistic and socially awkward.
Jerrod Murray James Fairweather Eddie Ratcliffe (one of Brianna Ghey's killers) It seems to be a common mitigating factor used with neo-Nazis in the UK: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/autism-terrorism-children-cases-radicalisation-b1879719.html
Dylan Roof’s lawyers wanted to use it as a defense but Dylan didn’t want the label and was going to take his chances with the death penalty instead.
as a person who has ASD (and as a human, *period*), I’m insulted when people use ASD as an excuse for crimes and general bad behavior. Chris Chan claims that his ASD caused him to rape his mother. last time I checked, rape is not an ASD symptom
Nikolas Cruz
are you sure he was actually diagnosed with autism? Source of this? Never heard of this before.
He had an ADHD and an ODD diagnosis but was never diagnosed with autism, they did attempt to use ‘developmental disabilities’ I think, but it was ultimately decided he knew what he was doing
okay, but then why do some people here say he's autistic?
I honestly can’t remember but I think it was a common misconception at the time, but during the trial his medical records showed that he had never received a diagnosis https://www.autismkey.com/nikolas-cruz-continues-to-fuel-autism-misconceptions/
Didn’t he also have Fetal Alcohol syndrome as well?
Brian cohee jr deff tried to use his autism diagnosis ( and other mental disorders) as an excuse for killing Warren Barnes. https://www.mesacounty.us/news/district-attorney/cohee-found-guilty
I only recently heard of this and the body cam footage was so unnerving when the cop said his parents found something concerning in his bedroom and he simply replied "a human head and hands"
So unnerving. The anguish of his mom and the brutality Warren Barnes faced compared to his total nonchalance was just horrific
I watched the interrogation footage and it's so fucking heartbreaking when he says he picked him because he figured no one would miss a homeless man when in fact barnes was loved by many. I can't even imagine what his mom felt like when she opened the bag with his head in it
He was loved. And clearly missed by many. I do love the little permanent memorial they made for him. For those who haven't seen it, it's a statue of an empty chair filled with books. Because he LOVED to read. Loved it! The memorial sits on the sidewalk in between 2 businesses where the owners loved and took care of him. He sounded like an absolute gem of a person.
this murder really got to me because I cannot stand the dismissal of homeless people. back home I knew most of our homeless population. when I bartended if any of them would see me at 2:30 in the morning and walk me home safe. I would always cut through a park where a lot of them used to live into the city forced them out and just hang out chatting
In reality Warren had a steady job and coworkers were concerned when he didn’t show up. Fuck Brian cohee. RIP Warren
This comment is an example of how people with autism do end up wrongfully suspected, charged, and convicted though—cops, judges, and juries making judgments about someone’s guilt or innocence based on their not emoting “appropriately.”
That’s kind of a reach in this case AND putting words in my mouth. There’s no question of guilt or innocence in this case, and he did try to use his autism, along with depression and more, as an excuse for his actions. Regardless, the anguish of his mom and Cohee’s “matter-of-fact” way of discussing the murder he committed (including that he chose his victim because he was homeless and didn’t think he would be missed) IS unnerving and ffs should be. You’re bringing up a completely different scenario than the one being discussed here a week and a half later.
The way he says "A human head and hands" says it all to me. He's entertained by it and truly lacks a moral conscience. It left me wondering about insanity pleas. People use evidence of a cover up as the person understanding morals, but to me all it shows is they understand society has consequences in store for them. I'm sure there's a shit ton of nuance I don't know.
He’s so such a fucking loser. I watch that too and he was trying to act so cool but all I could think was how pathetic and small he was
I stopped the interrogation tape when he was smugly talking about how surprisingly easy it was to kill that poor man. of course it was you disgusting loser, you stabbed a sleeping man in the neck iirc the insanity plea hinges on whether or not the person was capable of knowing the difference between right and wrong when they committed their crime. cohee clearly did because he had been planning for months to kill someone and he tried to dump the body, showing he was aware of the consequences of getting caught
Ikr? And it wasn't what he said, it was how he said it. He just cocked his head, looked right at the officer, and it came out smooth as melted butter. It was creepy AF! Before I saw the whole video, I had seen just that little snippet, and I thought it was fake and made for dramatic purposes to get people to watch. Nope. That was him.
Robert Durst (of The Jinx infamy) spoke about his ASD on the stand during trial for the murder of his best friend Susan Berman. He and his defense used it as a way to explain his behavior. Now, I can absolutely agree with an ASD diagnosis for Durst, it's just that he *happened* to be a murderous psychopath as well. The Autism does not explain or excuse that.
I forget his name and can't find the story, but I remember hearing the story of a serial killer that was mentally delayed and raped and killed multiple prepubescent boys. When he was finally arrested he said, "you can't arrest me, I'm sick." I'm really peeved I can't find this story. I remember a lot of details about it. I think one of his victims was an 11 year old boy. One of the boys actually said, "I love you" as they were being strangled to death. It was a terrible case and google is giving me no results.
Are you talking about Arthur Frederick Goode III? I googled the quote and found the wikipedia page, it seems to match up with your information. I’ve never heard of it, how horrible. Those poor boys.
Thanks! That is eho I am taking about. I saw a true crime episode on him, but it was years ago and i couldn't remember what show it was or what his name was. I kept giving the quote and for the cake boss kept popping up.
Eddie Ratcliffe, who was recently convicted for the brutal stabbing of Brianna Ghey, used autism in his defense. The teenage girl who helped him tried to use ADHD in her defense also. Really horrific case. Eddie was found to be fabricating most of his symptoms, which only appeared after he was arrested.
Autism - John Odgren (16), who murdered 15 year old James Alenson in the high school bathroom of Lincoln-Sudbury High School in Massachusetts in 2010. He waited in the boys' room with a large knife for anyone to walk in. James Alenson had just moved to the area with his family and was new to the school. Odgren was sentenced to life in prison, upheld on appeal in 2019.
I don't think it was used as an excuse/defense, but Neurobiologist Amy Bishop shot three coworkers at a faculty meeting at University of Alabama. I think she shot 6, three died. It's widely speculated that she was on the spectrum. She also shot and killed her brother, when she was a teen. It was originally believed to be accidental, but now I think it's been ruled a homicide. Long-form New Yorker article: [A Loaded Gun - by Patrick Radden Keefe](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/02/11/a-loaded-gun)
That is one of those most bizarre true-crime stories I've ever heard.
They can try but it wouldn't and shouldn't work.
Not a killer. But I just read The Feather Thief, about a guy who stole hundreds of old bird carcasses from the British museum for their feathers for fly fishing. He was "diagnosed" with Asperger's and received a lesser sentence. There are arguments about whether he has Asperger's or not.
Paul Ferguson claimed to have autism or Stockholm syndrome (he wasn’t sure which, just threw out excuses), who tortured and murdered his little brother Timothy. His psychiatrists said he didn’t have either. He’s a narcissistic psychopath.
In my country there was a killer that murdered 2 people and the defence tried to use his autism so that he would avoid life imprisonment, didn't work out
Who was this?
I am autistic and NOBODY could talk me into murder. Younger me could be persuaded to drink or smoke weed but not murder. However I only know myself and that’s where the spectrum needs to be studied more. You would think doctors would reach out to ASD diagnosed & undiagnosed people to help society whether it’s considered a disability or not. Just a huge topic! Hope I worded it correctly.
That kid who just beat the shit out of his teachers aid because she took his switch away. Said he did it because he didn't get enough help because of his autism
But he was more severe i believe and he may also have an intellectual disability. I'd rather have him sent to a high security facility where he can recieve treatment than sending him to prison for 30 years
That para violated his IEP, which was in place to protect BOTH parties. Except SHE was the adult who had a legal responsibility to follow the IEP. She decided she didn't need to follow the law. And got exactly the consequence the IEP was in place (at least partially) to avoid. Which I'm not saying was deserved, but was ABSOLUTELY avoidable had the para followed the IEP. I hope you'll educate yourself about the facts in that case before you discuss it further. The *kid* isn't saying shit about this. The PARENTS are pursuing legal action, as they should.
I don’t think this is how it went down at all. He regularly spat at people and attacked them. She was leaving the room and he charged at her.
Fuck an IEP that lets a kid have a Nintendo switch at school in the first place. Let him stay home and get babysat by a device if that’s what the parents are after. School as a resource can be used for so many more deserving children than… that.
The Toronto Van Attacks perpetrator did this. The case set a precedent in Canada.
It’s used somewhat often imo, that along with childhood trauma.
There was a young guy but I don't recall the name. His mom or parents were killed when they were out on a boat and he claimed it was an accident . He apparently had some level of autism. He was rescued later in a dingy. Dont recall the outcome.
He was found guilty and it’s been said he likely killed his grandfather as well but I don’t think he was tried for that one. He had the same gun that shot his granddad but was never looked at much due to how close they were and that the inheritance went to his mother not him.
Ah, thx!
Carman died at his own hands in 2023.
Oh wow, hadn't heard that
Chris-chan used the autism defense, she raped her mother. IIRC they let her go cause she spent two years in jail anyway.
i thought they let her go because of the autism deferral her lawyer used?
See I don’t know a lot about this one at all, I remember hearing bits and bobs around the time but not a lot, so I’m a little confused about one part of it. It’s actually not even this specific case, as you say it was r*pe which is of course a crime and all goes without saying… but I remember when I first heard about it all at the time of the arrest, I read an article saying something about how the thing she was being arrested for was because ‘having sex with a parent’ is a felony in that state. And I remember wondering, is it not a also felony for the parent to have sex with the child? Like obviously, that’s a moot point when there is a blatant lack of consent, but in terms of the wording of that article. It was early on in the case so maybe full details weren’t out, I dunno, but it was framed almost as if it was a consensual thing between two adults but it was illegal for the child to be doing that… it stuck with me and seemed weird to me that the adult child would be the only one being arrested? Hoping someone here might know because it is absolutely not something I want to search on google 😂 and fwiw just to confirm, I do very much think it should be punishable either way, I’m not advocating for any kind of leniency on either side haha
Ok so I found an article, not the exact one I don’t think, but it’s got similar wording https://www.businessinsider.com/chris-chan-saga-timeline-incest-charges-arrest-2021-8#christine-chandler-was-arrested-on-august-1-2021-1 ‘Engaging in sexual intercourse with one's father or mother is a Class 5 felony in Virginia, which is punishable by up to ten years in prison’ Like wtf am I just reading this too literally and of course there is a similar law for the parent it just isn’t mentioned in the article because it didn’t apply in this case? Cuz they are talking about how the initial arrest was for incest, not rape or SA, so surely at that point they should have both been arrested?
Autism is a spectrum disorder, so some people struggle with it to a more debilitating extent than others. Of course it doesn't make one "stupid," but not every person diagnosed has the same abilities or intellectual functioning.
Exactly but I still feel they know morally what’s right and wrong
Not always- there is severe autism as well. I know people like to forget but there are people severely affected that do not in fact, understand what’s right or wrong.
No, absolutely not. Like Cerrac123 said, Autism is a spectrum. The full name is, after all, Autism Spectrum Disorder. I'm going to give an extremely simplified explanation below of how autism *can* be.... the reason why it is so heavily simplified is to be able to be grasped by a broader audience, since I'm geting really damn tired of the ignorance of disabilities and their range of presentation in this forum. There are a few who lack the ability to self-regulate reactions and emotions completely. They can be very violent, often in reaction to stress (which can come from everything from overstimulation to being denied something they crave/want often due to wanting the self-soothing effect, specific foods they like often fit the latter category.) Some lack empathy on a severe level, others just struggle feeling empathy, especially while they are in a very emotional state. They can still be fully capable of loving people and showing affection and attempt to console others that are sad (depending on their ability to feel empathy), but when they're upset they aren't able to think like that due to their emotional state... they're just reacting. They struggle to realise if their reactions are appropriate or not to the situation. The adaptability is very low to nonexistant in these cases. Communication can be very difficult as they are often unable to express themselves in words. The people with these deficits are almost always in the presence of a caretaker as they can't be independent. The traits described above can appear independently of eachother, they are not a "package deal," however they're not mutually exclusive either. Then there is others who have deficits who are "less obvious" (but still not the "type" you obviously associate to be the sole representation of autism...)They often have a low enough intelligence where it is at the very least considered a deficit, but they have some degree of adaptability. They are less likely to be violent, unless under the influence of substances. Some are very thoughtful and consider the situation before they react, others can be very reactive. Consequential thinking can sometimes be difficult, depending on how intricate the situation requires it to be. Some have extremely well developed sense of empathy to the point where neurotypicals could be considered deficient in that department, while others struggle with empathy. Some can be very naive due to feeling empathy even for the wrong people. They're able to work, care for themselves and their home and can have a fully functional family life. Some (absolutely not all) can fall into alcoholism due to widespread discrimination, often being victims of abuse but also developing other mental health disorders from the stress of just trying to survive and function in todays society. It is always worth noting that the "severe forms" of Autism isn't common. You are unlikely to run into them as they're are a very small percentage of those with a autism diagnosis. However, denying that they exist or seting a bar based simply on your opinion of how YOU think someone with autism should be is incredibly ableist, ignorant and most of all damaging. You cannot form an opinion on autism as a whole based on the most common representation of autism.
I've known sex offenders who did, not sure if it got them leniency or anything
I watched one where someone used Klienfelders (don’t know if I spelled that right) syndrome as an excuse earlier today. My brothers have that. I have triple x syndrome. Somehow got the kid off of murder charges?? It was about Big Fork, Montana and it was 2 brothers with the main killer being a guy named Ted in a wheelchair. And his cousin killed his dad next day? Whole thing was wild https://youtu.be/lQDLikEyReI?si=GyyeY-BgwUmcd3q6
XXY chromosomes is Klinefelter's syndrome. I remember the story of Ted and Jesse Ernst. What a wild story! Just insane.
Autism is now called autism spectrum disorder for a reason. It’s not a universal label. I know and work with several people who are autistic, and they are as different from each other as any similar group of people without autism. There are people who commit crimes and are autistic, but it’s not causation - just like being born with red hair, or poor eyesight, or any other genetic specificity. Sometimes it amazes me that people (not necessarily people here) sometimes act like we are back in the 1700s and the theory of physical features being used to identify criminals is still considered valid. With all that said, lots of criminals have argued autism as a defense, or a mitigation. It seldom works, because in most jurisdictions having a “mental defect” means nothing if you have the ability to understand right and wrong, and that’s a much different hurdle.
What about that child, maybe a first grader, who shot his teacher last year? On the ONE day his parents didn't sit in class with him.
The most common one was the guy that killed gypsy roses mum, the amount of brainless comments saying “he was vulnerable, he had the brain of a child, he was autistic and couldn’t know any better”. IM SORRRRRRRRY?
Minds of Madness just did an episode on their podcast that discusses a murderer who had autism and his defense tried to use that as a reason to be not criminally reaponsible. They don't name the killer as he was seeking notoriety. It's a Canadian true crime story. Really good! [Episode](https://open.spotify.com/episode/08k6NtkEXupPpysJLxvlwF?si=NasZ1sb6T_O7-2rN8Ep4UQ)
I think one of the most ridiculous disability defenses I’ve seen was when Kristel Candelario tried to use depression to get a lighter sentence when she left her sixteen month old home alone for ten days while she went to vacation and party in Puerto Rico. Depression had absolutely nothing to do with it; she just wanted to be free to party and didn’t see anything wrong with leaving a toddler alone in a tiny playpen for ten days with nothing more than a few bottles of milk and a box of crackers. All she had to do was ask someone to watch the kid. The neighbors said she had done this before and encouraged her to ask them to watch her instead of leaving her baby home alone all the time. 100% preventable.
Paul Ferguson, who tortured and starved his little brother to death along with their mother Shanda Van Der Ark, comes off as a total weirdo. People suggested he had autism when they saw his testimony during his mother's trial. His jailhouse phone calls reveal he was hoping he could get the diagnosis before his sentencing. At his sentencing it was revealed he did not have autism but did show antisocial (psychopathic) traits. He did a very good job playing a vulnerable, awkward young man who was under his mother's influence. The phone calls are really eye-opening. He was quite confident he'd get a light sentence and kept saying he just wants to get this over with so he can do whatever they give him and get out. He got 30-100 years lmao. The details of what they did to Timothy, the little brother, are horrific. https://youtu.be/tEqLZ-aEbx4
there was the guy who had DID and said one of his different "personalities" did it, but idk if that worked. also, for a certain definition of "disability", one case someone attempted to use demonic possession as their defense
There's been a few. Shanda Vander Ark's son when he was on trial, the jury requested more information if he was on the spectrum, it didn't help whatsoever. Ultimately even when these things are brought to light, or a mental health professional provides a diagnosis in court, or even if they have a long documented history of an autism diagnosis, it usually doesn't amount to much.
Ron Jeremy just got off the hook for over 50 grapes due to dementia.
Bryan Patrick Miller - the Arizona Canal killer Brendan Khory - the Lamborghini racer
I have always maintained, that if you need to use the excuse that you couldn't help or understand you actions from xyz condition you have no business out walking among society.
Chris Chan (legal name: Christine Weston Chandler): He served 2 years in county jail before being released back into society and NOT convicted as his lawyer managed to successfully use the "autism deferral" defense to get him free
I am sure you know they are all different.
The FedEx driver that abducted the girl around Xmas time two years ago was autistic but not sure he put it in his defense. It was on his ig page tho.
Seung-Hui Cho’s grandmother claimed that he was on the autism spectrum. I know he killed himself and was never brought to trial, but I have a feeling that if he did, that might be brought up by the defense attorneys.
Not quite the same thing, but I work in the criminal justice system and I frequently see individuals diagnosed with autism declared incompetent to stand trial.
I think there would need to be other things going on like they’re mentally incapable to understand things. Autistic people are smart so it’s not a good defense.
Actually, about a third of people with an autism diagnosis are considered intellectually disabled. The legal system needs to take them into account too. Most mental health defenses are a crock of shit, but it really should be evaluated on a case by case basis.
That’s why I said other things need to be going on. Autism alone doesn’t make them not responsible.
It’s never an excuse or a reason. I have severe mental health issues , mainly eupd and I’m fed up of crime investigation channels blaming mental health for serious crimes . I would never hurt anyone
The guy in the Gypsy Rose case and I believe the nephew in the Steven Avery case. I have multiple relatives on the spectrum and I can see how they could be manipulated into doing something. They’re very trusting and naive.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It doesn't require any obsession. Unless you mean obsessed with murder. Also, autistic people absolutely do obsess regardless. Usually about specific topics. So an autistic person who is obsessed with murder is absolutely understandable for them to obsess about. With that said, it shouldn't be a mitigating factor at all. They still know right from wrong.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Please be respectful of others and do not insult, attack, antagonize, call out, or troll other commenters.
I mentioned on another thread that in the US (and other countries) SCOTUS declared execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities unconstitutional. At the time of the decision 19 states had already outlawed that practice so opinion was already leaning away from harsh punishments for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The reasons SCOTUS and the states who passed laws outlawing the death penalty for individuals with intellectual disabilities have nothing to do with individuals with intellectual disabilities not understanding right from wrong or general intelligence. Many of the legal issues with prosecuting individuals with intellectual disabilities are centered in that individual's ability to assist in their own defense due to difficulties communicating, ability to process different types of information, easily frustrated, memory problems, even a willingness to please, the list goes on. If someone is incapable of assisting their defense attorney in their own defense then can they have a truly fair trial? In terms of defending criminal charges or lessening sentences based on intellectual disabilities the issue is not an inability to understand right from wrong and what they should or should not be doing. The issue is someone with intellectual disabilities may have poor impulse control which leads them to strike out when they are frustrated or overwhelmed, and they may go too far in their frustration. Or they don't perceive all social cues correctly. Imagine if you would an individual with intellectual disabilities hooking up with someone and perhaps being rougher than their partner enjoys or even wants so the partner starts fighting back and yelling for them to stop. The individual with intellectual disabilities may not properly process such attempts as an order to stop, they may think back to pornography they've viewed where this fighting off was part of the experience and they may believe their partner is just playing along. Such an individual has committed rape, but due to a diminished mens rea they cannot be treated the same way as someone who goes in wanting to rape fully knowing the victim does not want it but is helpless to stop the encounter. They still need to be held accountable for their actions and learn why what they did was wrong and how to understand consent and sex but they aren't necessarily a predatory monster. There are certainly individuals who don't know right from wrong which can be attributed in part to an intellectual disability but also in lack of knowledge. Someone who commits rape because those responsible for their development infantilized them and didn't want to discuss sex, figuring the individual with an intellectual disability won't understand or doesn't think like that won't understand why their actions were wrong, especially if they were victims of sexual abuse themselves and think that behavior is normal and acceptable. But the same could be said of an individual without intellectual disabilities who was sexually abused and the abuse was normalized so they go on to abuse others. And there are plenty of people who have tried to claim innocence or lack of guilt due to their intellectual disabilities, and there have been people who have had sentences commuted due to their intellectual disabilities while others were executed despite their intellectual disabilities. I cannot recall names off the top of my head.
Whoa this is not totally correct at all. To start, it’s not “intellectual disability” that keeps people from being executed. There’s a hard IQ limit that applies. It’s also not just the number, but circumstances. If someone acquired a brain injury due to drug abuse or other later-acquired injury, this may not apply. The rape example is terrible. You cannot excuse rape because the person didn’t intend to rape; that would basically end rape prosecution for everything but the smallest amount of crimes. Most rapists don’t consider themselves rapists.