I am allergic to Phenergan, something I discovered as an adult capable of describing my reaction to it. An infant, groggy on codeine, could die from her reaction--unable to articulate the panic she was feeling as the world warped out of control.
It's not a common medication allergy, but that's how our bodies work: predictably except when they're not. Shaken Baby Syndrome has allowed society to revictimize parents and caregivers for decades, as if pseudo-science and sanctimony could actually save us from what used to be called Acts of God.
Prosecutors are responsible for this. Ken Paxton is a ghoul, a bloodsucker feasting on anyone's misfortune who's weaker than he is, killing in order to foster his campaign. Please stop him, however you can.
Nothing excites the MAGA type as the chance to kill someone. Legally or otherwise. Hence their refusal to conside a new trial that would take a man off death row.
It's all jake with them as long as they're guaranteed to get a government with exactly the same prejudices as them. The good old days is defined as the time when they had this guarantee.
To start with, the trial was clearly tainted. One way is that some trauma caused to the head was a result of screwing a medical monitor to her skull after he brought her to the hospital, and that was cited to the jury as part of diagnosing "shaken baby syndrome." There's other issues as well such as the reliance on highly questionable witness' anectdotal testimony, and the use of Phenergan, described by Dr. Rrrrrobotnix below, that were not presented to the jury.
The sentence should be overturned. However, failure to prove guilt does not mean "innocent." It just means that the legal system is required to give the presumption of innocence. To prove innocence, another factor should be conclusively determined to be the cause of death, and we don't have that either.
I don't think he's innocent, but I don't think he's guilty either. I just say we don't have enough information, and the trial was tainted by bad testimony and the conviction should be tossed.
However, now we come to the bigger reason for my rant. Currently it's more in vogue to say someone is "on the spectrum," not "autistic," as the latter has (greater) negative connotations.
Roberson was married twice, had a girlfriend, and had sole custody of his daughter Nikki. To me that says that he was "a high functioning individual." That terminology is also controversial nowadays, but without more information it's all I got that fits.
Being "on the spectrum" should not to be considered to absolve someone of responsibility for their actions - unless formal evaluation and diagnosis shows someone is incapable of perceiving right from wrong.
He cared enough about his daughter Nikki to have genetic testing done to prove patrimony, and successfully petitioned a judge to get sole custody over her guardians at the time, her maternal grandparents. Failure to show emotion does not indicate the individual does not prove that someone is incapable of feeling emotion. Its also not always due to autism - severe depression, various medications, etc. can also cause that behavior.
But in any case, please stop using "autistic" to prove innocence or as a sympathy ploy. If activists reject the "disabled" label and people "on the spectrum" should be thought of as equal members of society, they also need to accept that they have the full responsibilities of said membership.
I'll read responses with interest but will not bother to engage in dialogue with hostile replies, i.e. ad hominem attacks. They have no impact on me - I've been on the internet far too long.
I think the main reason "autistic" is relevant in this story is that one of the drs testified that the defendent didn't "seem upset" at the girl's death, and that's part of what led to his conviction.
Autism is a strong defense against that specific "piece of evidence".
(There's the overall problem of using *anyone's* apparent emotional reaction to trauma as evidence of guilt, but it's especially bad against someone diagnosed as autistic.)
Damn, I wish Molly Ivins were still alive, so I can ask her just what the hell is wrong with the men in Texas. (I was fortunate enough to attend one of her speaking engagements.)
If there is an afterlife, then I guarantee you that both Molly Ivins and my mother are spitting fire that they can't tell us what they think about recent events.
When Little Dude was in the NICU and we all had a really bad day, as in death’s door bad, I went ice cold and very clear, and knew exactly who in my then-large circle to call to give me good information so I could give the doctors good instructions about how I wanted him to be treated.
I did this by myself, because Wifey was catatonic.
Then, when the danger had passed, I went home and cried like my mother had just died.
People with flat affect have feelings too. We just don’t always show people.
Combine that with the All-American tradition of "men don't cry" and "the man has to stay focused and do whatever it takes to protect his family" while millions of thoughts are rolling around in your brain, and it should be understandable why people react differently under stress.
I'm not autistic, but this is me, full stop. I have to maintain a clear head when things are going south, elsewise my feelings are going to get in the way of getting shit done. The emotions can come, but later.
I will happily share my joy because I have learned that joy multiplies. I will sometimes share my anxiety because I have learned that it serves others in sympathy or empathy. But I rarely share my grief; it belongs to me, and I guard it fiercely. I don’t think I can change that. It simply is.
I agree, but your comment reminds me of things I've read about that happened in ancient times, when it was not uncommon for a king or lord or prince to kill every single person in an offender's family so that there would be no blood feud afterwards. I think this still goes on in some countries, but thank god we stopped doing it in the West. Instead, we leave their family impoverished and force them to work to get welfare benefits and deny their children free school lunches and medical care.
https://substack.com/@clayjak/note/p-174003590?r=9qphz&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
I am allergic to Phenergan, something I discovered as an adult capable of describing my reaction to it. An infant, groggy on codeine, could die from her reaction--unable to articulate the panic she was feeling as the world warped out of control.
It's not a common medication allergy, but that's how our bodies work: predictably except when they're not. Shaken Baby Syndrome has allowed society to revictimize parents and caregivers for decades, as if pseudo-science and sanctimony could actually save us from what used to be called Acts of God.
Prosecutors are responsible for this. Ken Paxton is a ghoul, a bloodsucker feasting on anyone's misfortune who's weaker than he is, killing in order to foster his campaign. Please stop him, however you can.
Someone should tell Ken Paxton that executing an innocent man won't be a good look for him when he's running for president.
Except that he'll never run for president. He's gunning for higher office in Texas. And it could very well be a good look for him there.
Ta, Robyn. No civilized country puts people to death for crimes. Paxton's showing off again.
I do believe there is exactly one crime worthy of the death penalty: TREASON.
My conservative/Father/lawyer is against the death penalty, mainly because poor people can't afford decent attorneys.
Literally the worst. WTF is wrong with Ken Paxton?
This is awful, it's just public ignorance causing terrible pain and solving nothing.
I'd also argue that anyone who has been in solitary confinement on death row for 22 years has already been punished enough.
Nothing excites the MAGA type as the chance to kill someone. Legally or otherwise. Hence their refusal to conside a new trial that would take a man off death row.
𝘖𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.
I will never understand people who think the government can't be trusted to deliver a postcard, but it's just fine with the power of life and death.
It's all jake with them as long as they're guaranteed to get a government with exactly the same prejudices as them. The good old days is defined as the time when they had this guarantee.
Weird, he's a white guy.
To start with, the trial was clearly tainted. One way is that some trauma caused to the head was a result of screwing a medical monitor to her skull after he brought her to the hospital, and that was cited to the jury as part of diagnosing "shaken baby syndrome." There's other issues as well such as the reliance on highly questionable witness' anectdotal testimony, and the use of Phenergan, described by Dr. Rrrrrobotnix below, that were not presented to the jury.
The sentence should be overturned. However, failure to prove guilt does not mean "innocent." It just means that the legal system is required to give the presumption of innocence. To prove innocence, another factor should be conclusively determined to be the cause of death, and we don't have that either.
I don't think he's innocent, but I don't think he's guilty either. I just say we don't have enough information, and the trial was tainted by bad testimony and the conviction should be tossed.
However, now we come to the bigger reason for my rant. Currently it's more in vogue to say someone is "on the spectrum," not "autistic," as the latter has (greater) negative connotations.
Roberson was married twice, had a girlfriend, and had sole custody of his daughter Nikki. To me that says that he was "a high functioning individual." That terminology is also controversial nowadays, but without more information it's all I got that fits.
Being "on the spectrum" should not to be considered to absolve someone of responsibility for their actions - unless formal evaluation and diagnosis shows someone is incapable of perceiving right from wrong.
He cared enough about his daughter Nikki to have genetic testing done to prove patrimony, and successfully petitioned a judge to get sole custody over her guardians at the time, her maternal grandparents. Failure to show emotion does not indicate the individual does not prove that someone is incapable of feeling emotion. Its also not always due to autism - severe depression, various medications, etc. can also cause that behavior.
But in any case, please stop using "autistic" to prove innocence or as a sympathy ploy. If activists reject the "disabled" label and people "on the spectrum" should be thought of as equal members of society, they also need to accept that they have the full responsibilities of said membership.
I'll read responses with interest but will not bother to engage in dialogue with hostile replies, i.e. ad hominem attacks. They have no impact on me - I've been on the internet far too long.
I think the main reason "autistic" is relevant in this story is that one of the drs testified that the defendent didn't "seem upset" at the girl's death, and that's part of what led to his conviction.
Autism is a strong defense against that specific "piece of evidence".
(There's the overall problem of using *anyone's* apparent emotional reaction to trauma as evidence of guilt, but it's especially bad against someone diagnosed as autistic.)
From back in the day:
"I will believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."
This poor, poor, innocent man!😭
Damn, I wish Molly Ivins were still alive, so I can ask her just what the hell is wrong with the men in Texas. (I was fortunate enough to attend one of her speaking engagements.)
If there is an afterlife, then I guarantee you that both Molly Ivins and my mother are spitting fire that they can't tell us what they think about recent events.
AHEM, is autistic. It’s a whole thing.
When Little Dude was in the NICU and we all had a really bad day, as in death’s door bad, I went ice cold and very clear, and knew exactly who in my then-large circle to call to give me good information so I could give the doctors good instructions about how I wanted him to be treated.
I did this by myself, because Wifey was catatonic.
Then, when the danger had passed, I went home and cried like my mother had just died.
People with flat affect have feelings too. We just don’t always show people.
Combine that with the All-American tradition of "men don't cry" and "the man has to stay focused and do whatever it takes to protect his family" while millions of thoughts are rolling around in your brain, and it should be understandable why people react differently under stress.
I'm not autistic, but this is me, full stop. I have to maintain a clear head when things are going south, elsewise my feelings are going to get in the way of getting shit done. The emotions can come, but later.
Me as well and I am female
That's me as well.
Yeah. Somebody has to be in charge, and I’m a good man in a storm.
I will happily share my joy because I have learned that joy multiplies. I will sometimes share my anxiety because I have learned that it serves others in sympathy or empathy. But I rarely share my grief; it belongs to me, and I guard it fiercely. I don’t think I can change that. It simply is.
My standard anti-death-penalty rant:
-no individual or government has any business judging who deserves to live or die
-the penalty doesn’t reduce crime, since crime is caused by social injustice and deprivation
-it punishes the wrongdoer’s family
-it can’t be reversed in cases of wrongful conviction
-it’s essentially a referendum on the likability of the victim
I agree, but your comment reminds me of things I've read about that happened in ancient times, when it was not uncommon for a king or lord or prince to kill every single person in an offender's family so that there would be no blood feud afterwards. I think this still goes on in some countries, but thank god we stopped doing it in the West. Instead, we leave their family impoverished and force them to work to get welfare benefits and deny their children free school lunches and medical care.
When our daughter was but a fetus, we were told she had some kind of heart condition that was potentially very serious.
Turned out to be a false alarm, but I felt like I could have punched the subway train off its tracks afterwards.
Point is, I guess eveyone's different when dealing with trauma.