Forensic Psychology
Ch. 5 Insanity and
Competency
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Insanity Determination
Difficulty in determining insanity
Insanity is a legal concept that may vary
from one jurisdiction to another
Requires a retrospective assessment of
the persons mental state at the time of
the offense (perhaps months or years
prior)
Insanity vs. psychosis
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Insanity Determination
Mens rea
a guilty mind
Not guilty by reason of insanity
(NGRI) defense
usually committed to a psychiatric
hospital
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Defining Insanity
MNaghten Rule
defect of reason
did not know the nature and quality of
the act he was doing
did not know that what he was doing
was wrong
cognitive test of insanity
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Defining Insanity, cont.
Irresistible impulse exemption
volitional aspect of insanity
The Durham Test
not criminally responsible if his or her
unlawful act was a product of mental
disease or defect
Any familiar clinical-diagnostic label?
currently used in only New Hampshire
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Defining Insanity, cont.
The ALI Standard, or Brawner Rule
substantial capacity
ability to appreciate wrongfulness
Currently, 20 states use the ALI
standard.
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Supplements to
Insanity Defense
Guilty but mentally ill verdict (GBMI)
defendant is provided treatment at a state
mental hospital until he or she is declared to be
sane, then is sent to prison
Criticisms:
differing definitions and incarceration decisions
difficulty distinguishing NGRI and GBMI
has not led to reduced NGRI acquittals
does not ensure that offenders receive effective
treatment
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Insanity Defense Reform
Act of 1984
Cognitive appreciation
Burden of proof
Congress shifted the burden of proof in
federal trials to the defendant to prove
insanity by clear and convincing evidence.
Most states concur, but with
preponderance of the evidence standard
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Psychologists Roles
in Insanity Cases
Assessment of Criminal Responsibility
Interviews
often unstandardized and unstructured
Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment
Scales (R-CRAS)
measures the ALI definition of insanity via 25
quantifiable variables
Mental Screening Evaluation (MSE)
to screen out those defendants whose law-breaking
actions clearly were not caused by a mental
abnormality
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Testifying as an
Expert Witness
Prosecution and defense may both have
experts with conflicting testimony
Sometimes defense experts can only
express general opinions
Difficult cross examinations
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Ultimate-Issue Testimony
Is it proper for an expert to express an
opinion about whether the defendant
was sane or insane at the time of the
offense?
Such testimony was one of the targets of
the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984.
modified federal law specifically to prohibit
mental health experts from testifying about
ultimate legal issues
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Assessing Competency
Competency to plead guilty
must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary
(Johnson v. Zerbst, 1938)
Dusky v. United States, 1960
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Assessing Competency
Competency to stand trial
decided by the judge, who often defers to the opinion of
the examining psychologist or psychiatrist
Competency Screening Test (CST)
Competency Assessment Instrument (CAI)
Fitness Interview Test-Revised (FIT-R)
Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT)
MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication
(MacCAT-CA)
Competency Assessment to Stand Trial for Defendants with Mental
Retardation (CAST-MR)
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Assessing Competency
Competency of juveniles
12 yrs. old or younger
mental illness or metal retardation
lower level of intellectual functioning
deficits in memory, attention, or interpretation of reality
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Malingering
The conscious fabrication or gross exaggeration of
physical and/or psychological symptomsto
achieve external goals. (DSM-IV, 2000, p. 683)
Rogers et al. (1990, 1994) distinguished three types:
pathogenic:
motivated by underlying pathology; genuinely disturbed
criminological:
antisocial or oppositional motivation
adaptational:
makes a constructive attempt, at least from the feigners
perspective, to succeed in adversarial circumstances
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
Assessing Malingering
Instruments:
MMPI-2
Malingering Probability Scale (MPS)
Structured Interview of Reported
Symptoms (SIRS)
M test
Malingering Scale (MS)
Fulero & Wrightsmans
Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition
