Forensic Psych Exam 1

What is forensic psychology?

professional practice by psychologists in any sub-discipline where they provide professional psychological expertise in the judicial system

What do FPs do?

- treat patients under court jurisdiction to help with a case

- consultation to attorneys, judges, agencies

- psych evals

What is a key role of therapeutic psych?

Advocate for the individual

What type of relationship is emphasized in therapeutic psych?

Helping and empathetic relationship

What is a fundamental principle regarding information in therapeutic psych?

Confidentiality

Who does therapeutic psych serve?

The patient

What standards does therapeutic psych adhere to?

Medical, psychiatric, and psychological standards

What is assumed about the patient in therapeutic psych?

The patient is assumed to be reliable

Is clarification for reasoning typically needed in therapeutic psych?

No clarification for reasoning needed

What type of documentation is typically provided in therapeutic psych?

Brief report

Is court testimony expected in therapeutic psych?

No expected court testimony

What is a key role of forensic psychology?

Advocate for the truth

How does the relationship in forensic psychology differ from traditional therapy?

It is more confrontational and not a caregiver relationship.

Is there confidentiality in forensic psychology?

No, there is no confidentiality and formal notification is required.

Who does a forensic psychologist serve?

Courts, attorneys, and clients.

What standards does forensic psychology incorporate?

Medical, psychiatric, psychological, and legal standards.

What types of data do forensic psychologists consult?

Legal documents, records, medical procedures, and observations.

Can patients be assumed to be reliable in forensic psychology?

No, patients are not assumed to be reliable.

What must forensic psychologists do to support their opinions?

They must support their opinion with reasoning and evidence.

What is a common requirement for forensic psychologists regarding documentation?

They are expected to produce lengthy reports.

What is a common expectation for forensic psychologists in legal settings?

They are expected to provide court testimony.

sources of authority

- Law

- Behavioral science research

- Ethical codes & guidelines of profession

- Practice literature

- need continued education in law/psych

voir dire

Jury selection process of questioning prospective jurors, to ascertain their qualifications and determine any basis for challenge.

stages of consultation

- prep

- data collection

- psych testing

- data interpretation

- communication

preparation stage

- identify relevant forensic issues

- accept referrals only in areas of expertise

- decline if cannot be impartial

- clarify role/financial arrangements

- appropriate authoritization

data collection stage

- multiple sources

- relevance/reliability (validity)

- historical info

- assess clinical characteristics/legally relevant behavior

- evals are quiet, private, no distrcations

- notification of purpose

- make sure person understands purpose of eval/limits on confidentiality

Why is using multiple sources important for FPs?

makes sure the information is consistent

psych testing stage

- objectivity to opinion

- time consuming

- significant expense

- mindful about individual truthfulness

data interpretation stage

- third party info/testing in assessing response style

- case specific evidence

- use empirical data applicable to populations similar to individual

- scientific reasoning

- describe findings and limits so they need little change under cross examination

communication stage

- attribute info to sources

- plain language

- write report in sections

- base testimony on Forensic Mental Health Assessment (FMHA)

- control the message

Jeffrey Deskovic

falsely confessed to rape and murder of classmate

- told police what they wanted to hear

power of confessions

- "most damaging evidence"

- more incriminating than eye witness/character testimony

When are confessions excluded?

- Police used physical force with suspects

- Promised suspects immunity

- Police threatened suspects with harm or punishment

- Police failed to inform suspects of their rights, as required by Miranda v. Arizona

Tactics police use to get a confession

- minimization/maximization (good/bad cop)

- implication of threat or promise

- suggested positive/negative incentives

false confessions

- happen 12% of cases

- between ages 16-20

Michael Crowe

- falsely confessed to murdering his sister after hours of heavy coercion and borderline psychological abuse

- DNA exonerated him

Miranda v. Arizona

afforded rights to suspects detained by police during custodial interrogation

Miranda Rights

- right to remain silent

- right to an attorney (own or priovided)

- informed what they can can be used against them in court

waiving Miranda Rights

- choosing to answer questions without an attorney

- must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent to be valid

intelligent waiver

- basic understanding

- comprehend meaning of effect of waiving and making incriminating statements

- role of mental health unclear

voluntary waiver

- consequence of suspect's will, not coercion

- don't consider state of mind, but characteristics of suspect

- totality of circumstances

How common are waivers?

- 58% adults waive

- 91% juveniles waive

totality of circumstances

A court review of all factors known to the officer at the time of the incident

- ex: age, education, intelligence

Who raises the issue of invalid waivers?

defense

- question whether confession is admissible

areas of functioning when assessing a waiver

- understanding rights warnings

- perceptions of intended functions of warnings

- capacities to reason about probable consequences of waiver/non-waiver decisions

assessing waivers

- look at relationships between functional deficits and psychological characteristics to judge whether deficits are real

interactive component (Miranda Rights)

comparing functional and situational circumstances

- ex: how were rights read, time of day/night, length of interrogation

Measures to Access (Miranda Rights)

instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of Miranda Rights

- 5 measures

Comprehension of Miranda Rights test

- Assesses a general understanding of the five individual prongs of the Miranda warning.

- Individuals are asked to paraphrase each of the five Miranda warnings.

CMR- Recognition test

- Assess understanding of 5 prongs, but non-verbally

- compare 3 sentences to Miranda warnings and indicate whether each is the same as the warnings

function of rights in interrogation are?

- Assesses an individual's appreciation of the significance of the Miranda warnings in legal circumstances.

- Do they understand the consequences of waiving?

Comprehension of Miranda Vocab test

- assess individual's understanding of critical words used in Miranda warnings

- asked to define 18 words and scored

Perceptions of Coercion during the Holding and Interrogation Process

- assess self-report likelihood of offering false confessions in various situations

Central Park Jogger Case

- 5 youths were convicted of rape/assault of woman

- signed confessions after 40 hours of interrogation

- testimonies were vivid but inconsistent

- real rapist convicted with DNA years later

- raised issues of racial profiling and discrimination

competency to stand trial (CST)

the ability to participate adequately in criminal proceedings and to aid in one's own defense

Dusky v. US

ruled to assess whether defendant has competency to:

- consult with a lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding

- rationally and factually understand proceedings

Pate v. Robinson

- ruled that issue of a defendant's competence to stand trial can be raised by defense, prosecution, or the Court.

- Failure to raise the issue can result in a violation of the defendant's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

What does Jackson v. Indiana state about holding a defendant indefinitely?

A defendant cannot be held indefinitely while waiting to be deemed competent.

What must happen if a defendant remains incompetent after a certain period of time according to Jackson v. Indiana?

They must be given a hearing, charges may be dropped without prejudice, and the defendant is considered for civil commitment.

PA definition of competent

- focus on the present state, NOT at the time of offense

- defendant may have history of mental illness, but still be competent

How does mental illness play into competency?

if mental illness impairs defendant's ability to participate in legal proceedings in a meaningful way and cooperate with attorney

Dusky 2 Prong Test

1. Does defendant understand charges/legal proceedings?

2. Can defendant assist lawyer in own defense?

Dusky "Understand"

- charges

- possible penalties

- adversarial nature of legal system

Dusky "Assist"

- communicate with attorney

- testify on own behalf

- concentrate on proceedings

- behave appropriately

- rational decision making

Assessing competency

- interview

- review records (criminal, medical, mental health)

- use testing (clinical, intellectual, specialized for competency)

Competency tests

- Competency Screening Test (CST)

- MacCAT-CA --> hypothetical situations

- Competency Assessment Instrument (interview)

- Fitness Interview Test - Revised (FIT-R)

Fitness Interview Test- Revised (FIT-R)

- structured interview for competency

- 3 clusters of questions

What is the first cluster of FIT-R questions?

Understanding nature/object of proceedings (factual knowledge)

second cluster of FIT-R

Understanding possible consequences (appreciation of personal involvement)

third cluster of FIT-R

Communicate with Counsel (participate in own defense)

FIT-R scoring

0 = competent

1 = mild impairment

2 = serious impairment

FIT-R Understanding

defendant understands:

- arrest/court/legal procedure

- nature of charges

- role of participants

- pleas --> pleading guilty = waive right to trial

FIT-R Appreciation Test

defendant appreciates:

- range and nature of possible penalties

- appraisal of available legal defenses

- appraisal of likely outcomes

FIT-R Communication test

defendant's capacity to:

- communicate facts to lawyer

- relate/trust lawyer

- plan legal strategy

- engage in own defense

- challenge prosecution

- testify relevantly

- manage court behavior

stages of assessing competency

1. Request competence determination

2. Evaluation

3. Judicial determining

4. Disposition and provision of treatment

5. Rehearing (Jackson)

restoring competency

usually meds combined with instruction on courtroom procedures

Competency to waive right to counsel

right to self-represent

- standby may be appointed

- assign counsel to mentally ill who cannot effectively represent themselves

- court can terminate self-rep

Competence to refuse insanity defense

when defendant doesn't want to assert mental status defense

- emphasizes society's interets in not convicting a morally blameless person

- requires following defendant's decision if competent to make it

Why reject insanity defense?

- longer confinement

- better treatment in prison than mental hospital

- avoid stigma

- loss of legal rights

- view crime as political/religious act

Competency to testify

- applies to anyone who can be a witness

- capable of remembering and reporting and grasp importance of doing so

Competency to be sentenced

defendant who is unfit to proceed cannot be sentenced

- previously convicted defendant who becomes unfit after sentencing cannot have his sentence carried out while incompetency continues

Competency to be executed

Ford v. Wainwright (1986): "Whether a prisoner knows the fact of their impending execution and the reason for it."

proving a crime

State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the actus reus (action) with the requisite mens rea (intention) for the crime

M'Naghten Case (1843)

delusional man thought government was out to kill him and accidentally killed Prime Minister's assistant

- found insane and spent 20 years in a mental asylum

What is the M'Naghten Rule?

A rule for determining insanity in legal cases.

first factor of M’Naghten Rule

Whether the defendant knew what he or she was doing.

second factor of M’Naghten Rule

Whether the defendant knew that what he or she was doing was wrong.

irresistible impulse

an insanity defense can be established by proving that the accused had an uncontrollable urge to perform the act

popular beliefs about the insanity defense

popularized by media

1. used my many defendants

2. usually successful

3. immediately released

4. defendants are dangerous

What percentage of cases use the insanity defense?

1%

What is the success rate of the insanity defense?

25%

What typically happens to individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity?

They are almost always hospitalized.

What is the 'charge effect' for individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity?

It is the same as prison; more serious charges result in longer hospitalization.

What is the rearrest rate for acquittees on conditional release?

They are rearrested at low rates but more likely to be rehospitalized.

PA insanity defense

M'Naghten rule

- did not know what he was doing/didn't know it was wrong --> mental disease or defect

What historical aspects are assessed in an insanity evaluation?

Criminal history, mental health history (including psychotic, mood, and personality disorders), and medical history.

Insanity assessments

Interview, psychological testing (SADS, SCID, MMPI, PAI), and third-party interviews.

What factors are considered regarding the mental state at the time of the offense in an insanity assessment?

Arrest records, witness statements, interviews with third parties, and interviews with the defendant.

What functional demands must be assessed in an insanity evaluation?

The individual was able to know the nature and wrongfulness of their actions and conform their conduct to legal requirements at the time of the offense.

automatism

the performance of actions without conscious thought or intention.

- ex: commits a crime while sleeping