3 ms·

This is medieval and shameful, and needs to be overturned with the help of human rights groups and media exposure. Neither autism nor cyber crime of this type

This is medieval and shameful, and needs to be overturned with the help of human rights groups and media exposure. Neither autism nor cyber crime of this type are a life sentence to anywhere. Autism is not a condition that is treatable by mental institutions. Its like sentencing someone to a mental institution for being left-handed. While I wouldn't agree with this solution either, even lifetime home monitoring would be infintely more humane and rational. That is, depriving the guy of computer access. Why was that solution skipped in favor of an extremely brutal one? If it was tried and failed, then that's a failure of monitoring. The bridging logic and justice isn't "okay, mental institution".

oldtownroad 3y ago
He’s a compulsive criminal, he was able to continue committing crime despite being restricted from accessing a computer. He wasn’t confined to an institution because he did a crime, it’s because he has admitted that no matter what he will continue this behaviour and so institutionalising him is the (regrettable) next step in trying to rehabilitate him. He will be released when he’s rehabilitated, whether that takes a month or a decade - he’s institutionalised indefinitely but not permanently, there is a path out.
- johann8384 3y ago
  Except he wasn't restricted really, he had a computer in his hand.