Autistic adults exempt from jury duty

Post Reply New Topic

you have my honest sympathy, that would rile me.

In my 13 years of being a member here, I have learnt that most Aspies are impartial, which sometimes gets on my nerves.

OP: Are you saying that from a legal standpoint, Autistics are exampt from jury duty?
Or that your friends think they should be?
How insulting, this idea that Autistics wouldn't understand the tehcnical terms. ASD is NOT an intellectual handicap. We can be quite objective on a jury, whereas NTs would be more prone to judge a defendant by their looks. This is why it's a stone-cold fact that good-looking murder defendants are far more likely to be acquitted.

While Autistics would be using logic and facts to determine guilt vs. innocence, the NTs would get all mixed up with their emotions or, at least, be weak with their logic and understanding of the evidence presented. I've been watching true crime for years, and am aware of high profile cases like Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson.

The evidence is under the jury's nose, yet they find murderers innocent, even though the evidence against the defendant is in neon lights. I've seen this happen in true crime docudramas. Just when you think it's a slam dunk case for the prosecution, the idiot stupid f*ck jurors find the sleaze ball defendant innocent!! I want to be alone in a room for two minutes with every juror who found them innocent.

Or, when the evidence is stacked against the defendant, and it's SOOOO obvious they're guilty, the jury takes 12 hours to finally arrive at this conclusion, even though the evidence is like "Duhhhh, he did it!"

And we all know that most jurors are NT because most people in the general populace are NT.

So if ANYONE makes a poor juror, it's the typical NT. A jury full of Autistics would filter out the emotions and silly thinking and cut right to the bone of facts, logic and evidence.

i wish jurors would be made a professional class with commensurate pay and bennies.

The first and last time I did jury duty, my biggest problem was that I had a hard time controlling my laughter because the case was so stupid and ridiculous. A rich white lady was driving her car with her poodle in it and noticed a tick crawling up her leg so she stopped where and when she should not have stopped her car in the middle of the road to try to remove the tick. Two young black kids ended up rear ending her because she stopped suddenly. She was suing the black kids and claiming all this pain and agony and physical therapy she would need because of the extensive injuries she sustained. The car barely had a dent in it, yet she was acting like she would need years of physical therapy and counseling. I figured years of psychiatric counseling would be more appropriate. We ended up awarding her ten thousand dollars for physical therapy which I thought was a bit much. But she was hoping to get over two hundred thousand.

It was in the nineties so it was a while ago. I might have been the only black person on the jury and possibly the only Autistic but it's impossible to know if anyone else was Autistic. I don't remember if there was another black person or not but most of the jury was white. I didn't think we should have let her win because a tick is not an excuse to stop short in traffic causing others to rear end you. She could have pulled over or she could have put tick prevention medicine on her dog. But the deliberation was going on and on because I kept saying that she didn't deserve a big payout. Eventually, I just got exhausted of all the back and forth and agreed to settle for ten thousand which is what everyone thought was fair. I thought it was ridiculous that she should have gotten away with that.