A deaf killer who grew up on the streets and was never taught sign language, has been given a hefty sentence. His education - what there was of it - was poor. He could not even go to trial for seven years because he had to be taught sign language in order to understand the charges he faced.
An earlier news article reported that he had a low IQ in the 60s, which by definition would have made him mildly intellectually disabled. Plus, instead of learning real sign language, he reportedly only had a family based system of home signs. Academically, he scored far below peers.
So this provoked a thought in my mind: when there is no true sign language but only a system of home signs, does this mean that a person is incapable of understanding right versus wrong? Can someone who is mildly intellectually disabled understand the difference between right and wrong? Was he really intellectually disabled or did he have a low IQ only because of his limited English? Prior to his trial, two experts thought he had been faking communication problems to avoid trial. If he knew how to fake it, then did that mean he did in fact understand the difference between right and wrong - whether or not he knew real sign language?
Cases like this one raise more questions than answers.
Related blog post: Low Functioning Deaf Killer to Be Freed?
No, because there are plenty of people who were in the same situation and don’t kill people. The only thing is, it makes it hard for him to get help when he needed it when he was younger. Withholding sign language prevent deaf people from sharing knowledge and support from people outside of the family especially when they can’t speak or hear and use homesign.
Again, we see this type of deaf criminal with violent history and limited education.
Questions we should be asking are: what exposure to ASL did he have in his younger years? Did he have even one year of ASL? What was the extent of home sign that he and his family used?
Was he subject to abuse in childhood and was he brought to the attention of authorities at all previously?
Did he have any Deaf contacts, perhaps neighbors or former schoolmates?
And, most of all, were any of his evaluators knowledgeable Deaf professonials with experience with people like him, and who were able to see him during these seven years to build a rapport?
While it is possible for people to be born without conscience (sociopathic personality) I don’t believe lack of education is a cause for lack of conscience. That could come from bad parenting, abuse, neglect, brain damage, or mental illness.
We have seen nonverbal, uneducated people with awareness of right and wrong from having been well raised and loved in childhood.
No, killer somehow at some point knows right and wrong.. The question should bring to our attention: does lack of communication prevent killer to seek for help? Does lack of communication prevent killer to question and communicate about right and wrong?? The concept is, person cannot express himself, he is more likely to act in violence.. Whose fault is it?? Should be their family since they do not provide communication.. I wish somehow they should prosecute family because those kind of violence are preventable.
I agree to the first comment where it was hinted that the crime committed by a person and his status of being deaf or not have no connection whatsoever…there is nothing about deafness that is related to innocence or consciousness. A criminal should be prosecuted like everybody else as long as he is mentally aware of his actions.
I agree with Dianez .. That’s depend on the deaf man’s education without ASL and Have to use CDI interpreter to use home sign. Acess something that court might not know how to deal with their requirement access for this man.
This guy is very difficult childhood without education and without taught him nothing for Sign Language.
Remember back to 1970’s it is called Dummy author the lawyer is deaf man who he used to tried to save the deaf American African guy from New York. End up so similar with that the deaf and I don’t appreciate to be called him MUTE!
Because they think deaf cannot talk. Some of them are baloney to be label while he cannot able to find a ASL or cannot find a school. Who is fault?
Not his mother’s fault.. she tried so hard to find a good school for her own son.
All things they are REJECTED deaf man mean will be pass germ around with people who afraid to work with deaf. There is no make a sense!! Failing : Due to A.D.A. same time were not the passed the law.
It is a question of whether he was able to reason (and his apparent inability to do could equate to his potentially low IQ.) However, IQ is an educated measurement and without education someone can’t really score very high but that wouldn’t necessarily mean they weren’t intelligent. Education relates to opportunity without which we may seem sub-intelligent. Not killing is a social more based on human rights. There have been (and still are) many societies and cultures where killing is accepted and indeed expected. Western culture does not accept killing another person (thank goodness). So the main question is whether before this man killed did he know and understand it wasn’t acceptable in our society. Could he think and reason enough to know this?