I think the greater point is that if the legal system is supposed to alter behavior, it should follow the science and the science suggests that simply punishing crimes based on a rulebook isn't very efficient at preventing future crimes.
It doesn't matter if the man is autistic for his behavior to have a negative impact. The impact would not have been any better or worse if he wasn't autistic.
The question thus should be how to prevent this kind of behavior, or in his case, how to make it less likely that he'll do it again. His autism may factor in to the answer for that, but either way throwing the book at him is likely not the best solution.
Of course this assumes the purpose of the legal system is crime prevention, not punishment as an end in itself, which seems to contradict reality.
It doesn't matter if the man is autistic for his behavior to have a negative impact. The impact would not have been any better or worse if he wasn't autistic.
The question thus should be how to prevent this kind of behavior, or in his case, how to make it less likely that he'll do it again. His autism may factor in to the answer for that, but either way throwing the book at him is likely not the best solution.
Of course this assumes the purpose of the legal system is crime prevention, not punishment as an end in itself, which seems to contradict reality.