Post Closed as "off topic" by rjzii, Tom77, Flimzy, SIMEL, Sklivvz
7 made the question (hopefully) more concrete
source | link

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, theyI heard people name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge foundhas been convinced that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place. I don't mean cases where clinically verifiable impairment, like alcoholism or a environmentally induced lack of empathy, has been used to explain the deed, but a case where the only explanation of the act is the argument that a person isn't free to do otherwise as she did because of determinism in any way.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, I heard people name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge has been convinced that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise.

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place. I don't mean cases where clinically verifiable impairment, like alcoholism or a environmentally induced lack of empathy, has been used to explain the deed, but a case where the only explanation of the act is the argument that a person isn't free to do otherwise as she did because of determinism in any way.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

6 Added definition.
source | link

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biologicalbiological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

5 it's not only the social determinism i was asking about
source | link

Have US judges ever declared someone not guilty due to social determinism?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a socialbiological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education" or, an "unloving mother". or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

Have US judges ever declared someone not guilty due to social determinism?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education" or an "unloving mother".)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs outside of their control?

Have US judges ever declared someone not guilty due to determinism?

I am often confronted with arguments for or against biological or social determinism versus free will. One of the arguments I hear regularly is that determinism is bad for society because denying the possibility "to have done otherwise" undermines the foundation of our moral system.

As a final point, they name the case of an defendant being exculpated in front of a U.S. court because the judge found that there is a biological/social determinism that didn't allow the defendant to do otherwise (e.g. because of "bad education", an "unloving mother" or simply because his brain is what it is)

While I am not interested in a discussion on the topic of guilt and determinism, I would love to know if such a case has ever taken place.

Has there ever been a U.S. case where the defendant has been found not guilty, despite committing an otherwise criminal act, because it was argued that it wasn't their fault due to social constructs or biological reasons outside of their control?

4 removed phrase about "tricking" the judge. i don't think an answer could depend on whether or not the judge was "tricked"
source | link
3 edited title
| link
2 Simplified language. Defined some terms.
source | link
1
source | link