tl;dw he had a “flat affect” after his daughter died because he was autistic, not because he was a murderer

  • Cammy [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    3 months ago

    Not even going into autism, there are so many misconceptions around what constitutes an appropriate reaction to death.

    It’s fucked up to think of the people tortured and murdered because they didn’t react to tragedy in a socially acceptable way.

    And we somehow trust judges in the US to make an accurate call on this?

    • Vent@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m still stuck on the part where we convict people due to their emotions and not due to evidence that they committed the crime. Smiling during a robbery is not conducive to actually performing said robbery, so why is it admissible in court? The judge shouldn’t need to make a call on this at all.

      • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve seen a lot of “the victim was insufficiently distressed therefore they must be lying” in spousal abuse cases. Performance is apparently a huge part of how much you’re believed in court

        • Cammy [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          Alternatively, “The victim was overly distressed and therefore was lying.”

          Western legal systems tend to favor Morton’s Fork.