Advocacy/USA~Supreme Courts ruled Jury 's should hear AS DX.

[Guest guest]

Greetings:

For many with AS who have landed in criminal court, some Judges have refused to allow the jury to hear the AS dx.. This is about to change in the USA... Keep in mind the BIGGER picture. Some cases that the courts have heard involved non-violent crimes where the Judge was harsh in the sentencing phase due to the AS person appearing cold with no remorse which may be the case or not. [this is just MY personal opinion. It will be interesting to read the opinion when it is released. YOUR thoughts? ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The case:

6/11/08

A-36-07 State v. lin Burr, II(Middlesex County and Statewide)Argued 3/10/08

Under the circumstances presented, was evidence that defendant suffered from Asperger’s Disorder admissible in defending against charges of sexual molestation of a minor? While expert psychiatric testimony can sometimes take a trial on an irrelevant side trip, in this case it's a worthwhile excursion to help the jury -- which is engaged in a search for the truth -- better evaluate the case in front of it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What jurors should know

June 13, 2008 10:30PM

Even if judges and juries are appropriately wary of psychiatric testimony in criminal cases, sometimes it can be critically important to jurors' full understanding of the case before them.

That certainly is true in the case of lin "Jack" Burr, a 60-year-old East Brunswick piano teacher convicted of molesting a 9-year-old girl. Burr has Asperger syndrome, a fact the jury that convicted him was never told. The state Supreme Court on Wednesday said the jury should have been informed.

The court got it right, and the retrial it ordered should be a much fairer procedure.

Psychiatric testimony might have been crucial to a better understanding of Burr's behavior. Unfortunately, the trial judge, Superior Court Judge Paley, refused to allow it.

Asperger syndrome, a disorder on the autism spectrum, is characterized by inappropriate social interactions, among other behaviors. Knowing that might have cast Burr's behavior in a different light for the jury, the Supreme Court noted.

Burr was accused of touching a piano student intimately over her clothes on many occasions. The child also testified that he would pull her onto his lap.

The prosecution theory at trial was that Burr let the girl sit on his lap to "groom" or prepare her for sexual assault. The defense argued that much of this behavior stemmed from his disorder, and sought to have the jury hear expert testimony about Asperger syndrome.

Nothing the Supreme Court did suggests someone with Asperger syndrome is entitled to a free pass when it comes to sexually molesting children. A jury might still find Burr guilty, but psychiatric testimony will shed new light on the facts.

Psychiatric testimony could have given the jury another explanation for Burr's behavior. It might also have explained some odd conduct he engaged in during the trial, the court noted. Perhaps most important, it might have encouraged Burr, who did not testify on his own behalf, to take the witness stand.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2008/06/what_jurors_should_know.html