And Sapolsky still doesn’t understand the court’s ruling.

[GoodTaste]

According to the expression "And Sapolsky still doesn’t understand the court’s ruling", I guess that "he received 25 months of incarceration" refers to Sapolsky received 25 months of incarceration.

Am I on the right track?


-----------------
09 August 2017 18:56

With respect to the radiolab busey syndrome case, he received 25 months of incarceration (not 8 years). And Sapolsky still doesn’t understand the court’s ruling. The judge didn’t split the baby, arguing that the culprit could control his impulses during the day and thus had at least partial free will, and thus partial culpability. Rather, it granted the argument that the culprit could not control his impulses at night; granted the biological differences between day and night. But it held that during those times of daytime lucidity, the culprit could have asked for help. Knowing that he was going to offend—and economically support an industry that rapes children—he had a duty, during times of lucidity, to get help and find a means of stopping himself from inevitable future offenses.

Source

 

[Tdol]

Here's the background to the case. Sapolsky appears to think that the judge's decision to give him a reduced sentence after taking the man's condition into account was wrong. He believes that once the man's medical condition had been recognised, it should have been grounds for a dismissal of the case rather than a reduced punishment.

You can hear the part where he speaks about it here: https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-biology-of-good-and-evil (It comes just after the 1 hour point)