As the anon that wrote the comment you replied to you, I agree that it is relevant that the media addresses her being a furry in this case, since it was pulled up in court. My previous post was more speaking in general, referring how there are many other news stories where it is the media that brings up unrelated interests and hobbies (furry being only one of many that seem to have such problems). In this case the defence attorney seems to fit the pattern, not the media reporting the case. The attorney may have a legit point, although the unhealthiness of an obsession would probably be more important to the case than the target of the obsession. But it could also be a misunderstanding or simply a cheap tactic.
As the anon that wrote the comment you replied to you, I agree that it is relevant that the media addresses her being a furry in this case, since it was pulled up in court. My previous post was more speaking in general, referring how there are many other news stories where it is the media that brings up unrelated interests and hobbies (furry being only one of many that seem to have such problems). In this case the defence attorney seems to fit the pattern, not the media reporting the case. The attorney may have a legit point, although the unhealthiness of an obsession would probably be more important to the case than the target of the obsession. But it could also be a misunderstanding or simply a cheap tactic.