1

Article Review: The Value of Crime Scene and Site Visitation by Forensic Psychologists

and Psychiatrists

Jennifer D. Chapman

Southern New Hampshire University

PSY205: Forensic Psychology

Tyler Cox, Esq.

February 16, 2021

2

Article Review: The Value of Crime Scene and Site Visitation by Forensic

Psychologists and Psychiatrists

In the article “The Value of Crime Scene and Site Visitation by Forensic Psychologists

and Psychiatrists” written by Kris Mohandie, Ph.D. and J. Reid Meloy, Ph.D. the benefits of

having Forensic Psychologists and/or Psychiatrists at crime scenes (for the purpose of this paper,

only Forensic Psychologists will be refered to, instead of including both Psychologitsts and

Psychiatrists.) The main point of the article, is to allow Forensic Psychologists to visit crime

scenes as soon as they are rendered safe after the crime has taken place and the scene is secured.

The topic I chose, which led to the review of this article is “crime scene assessment by Forensic

Psychologists. This article directly relates to the chosen topic, as it was written to provide

evidence as to why assessment of a crime scene by a Forensic Psychologist is not only

advantageous, but allows for review of the situation without the risk of muddied second-hand

information that could provide a detriment to the Forensic Psychologist’s final conclusions and

reporting.

Reducing risk of error surrounding behavior and environmental influence is the primary

reason Mohandie & Meloy cite as reason for Forensic Psychologists to access and assess a crime

scene as early post-crime as possible (p 719). Although video evidence can sometimes be

available – particularly in the case of officer-involved incidents – this often creates a

disadvantage for the reviewing Forensic Psychologist, as only one point of view is visible. The

American Psychological Association (2011, as cited in Mohandie & Meloy, 2013) in section

9.01 of The Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology denotes that Forensic Psychologists

must be able to observe the situation from all angles and perspectives. Section 9.02 advises

Forensic Psychologists to avoid utilizing only one source when reporting.

3

Reviews of such situations where an evaluating Forensic Psychologist relied only one one

source of data, such as a police officer’s bodycam footage were found to have problems

regarding credibility. In such instances, witnesses and other police officers were found to have

been influenced by other witness statements, and their position and proximity to the crime. To

allow crime scene visitation at the onset of a secured crime scene, according to Mohandie &

Meloy, would significantly reduce the number of discrepancies, and allow the evaluating

Psychologist to walk the steps of each individual involved, allowing for each point of view to be

accounted for.

Statistical research was not conducted for this article, and no data was scientifically used

to draw conclusions. However, as noted in the above paragraphs, there was review of cases both

with and without utilization of Forensic Psychologists assessing crime scenes. The findings

between the differences in crime scenes when a Psychologist was allowed access right away,

versus when they were not, showed a vast difference in reporting, evaluation, and overall data

verification. As quoted in the article, there are numerous benefits for Forensic Psychologist

crime scene assessment:

Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists engage in a multitude of activities that may be

enhanced by site visitation: mental state at the time of the offense and criminal

responsibility evaluations, evaluations of malingering, assessments of claimed injuries in

civil litigation, expert opinions about the appropriateness of particular strategies

employed by law enforcement in use of force cases with mentally ill or suicidal subjects,

and mitigation-related evaluations for sentencing, including capital murder cases. (p 720).
4

Mohandie & Meloy also go on to list other advantages to crime scene visitation, such as

an imperative time frame to assess a witness’s credibility, and analyzed details and factors that

may have been left out due to an investigator’s opinion of irrelevance (p 721).

References used for this article were peer-reviewed articles in prominent psychology

journals, such as Behavioral Sciences & the Law; technical books published by CRC Press, such

as Forensic Psychology and Neuropsychology for Criminal and Civil Cases; as well as

guidelines from American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL), and the American

Psychological Association (APA). These sources would be considered reliable and valid.

Particularly if you consider the guidelines referenced from AAPL and APA. AAPL is dedicated

to research and education, specifically in the field of Forensic Psychology. The same can be said

about APA, given that it touts itself as being the largest organization of psychologists. The

guidelines from AAPL and APA are in place to benefit both practicing psychologists and the

work that they do.

When you consider the other sources mentioned above, such as articles from Behavioral

Sciences & the Law, it enhances Mohandie & Meloy’s credibility. The article referenced from

this journal is “The Role of the Psychologist in Crisis/Hostage Negotiations”, wherein one of the

authors is C. Hatcher. A review of other articles Hatcher has written shows a wide range of

topics involving psychology, indicating expertise. If you also consider that Behavioral Sciences

& the Law is a well-respected, peer-reviewed journal, you can gather that Mohandie & Meloy

chose to represent themselves well in this article by referencing experts in their field.

Although there are not many publications out there that I could find regarding Forensic

Psychologists assessing crime scenes, it is clear that the information presented in the article was

well-written and demonstrated thoughtfulness in its presentation of the topic. The information
5

was presented in an easy-to-follow format, and built information on top of itself in a logistical

manner, allowing the reader to understand each next paragraph as it pertained to the last.

Consider also that this article was published to the Journal of Forensic Sciences, which is a peer-

reviewed journal for all aspects of forensic sciences. Its thoughtfulness is also laid out in the

manner of which the article not only presents why crime scene assessment is important and

beneficial to the crime itself, the following investigation and resulting evaluations, but Mohandie

& Meloy present further guidelines. These suggested guidelines do not simply allow free reign of

the crime scene by the Forensic Psychologist, but instead are suggestions that are meant to

benefit all investigative parties involved. For example, Mohandie & Meloy outline that the

psychologist must be taken through the crime scene, as it played out, by someone with “intimate

knowledge of the known facts, as well as facts in dispute, either from their first-hand knowledge,

or because they have extensively viewed the case from all angles.” (p 722).

Another well-addressed topic within the article are the possible limitations that may

impede crime scene visitation. Psychologists may worry they do not have the proper training or

experience to be present at a crime scene, they may feel they are not sufficiently paid to take on

additional physical work, or they may feel emotional resistance to physically viewing a violent

crime scene, like in the case of a homicide. In the instance of Forensic Psychologists reviewing

the physical crime scene, it is stated very clearly in this article that these limitations must be

understood and addressed in order for this idea to become practice.

Perhaps one of the most striking lines from the conclusion of this article is this:

“The authors are not suggesting that forensic psychologists and psychiatrists engage in

“ambulance chasing” or first responding related to their usual forensic roles. Rather, we

are suggesting that site visits and crime scene visitation…may be useful data gathering
6

techniques that can lead to the discovery of perspectives not previously considered.” (p

723).

This allows the reader to understand that Mohandie & Meloy are not simply advocating for

Forensic Psychologists to take on the role of Crime Scene Investigators and play detective at

murder scenes. What it does say is that with the proper tools, and the agreement & understanding

from all parties involved, Forensic Psychologists can provide a beneficial perspective to the

crime scene. The analysis of behavior and influence (for perpetrators, victims, witnesses,

bystanders), paired with analysis of evidence, timelines, and other related materials allow for a

greater threshold of understanding the scene at hand.

The authors are further granted validity by acknowledging limitations that may pose a

threat to implementing this as practice, and understanding that this cannot become practice

without resolving such issues, or reducing the number of limitations. In addition, the guidelines

posed by the authors demonstrate – as with the quote above – that they do not expect Forensic

Psychologists to take over crime scenes, or be the key to each puzzle that solves the mystery.

Simply put, this is an idea that could, with the proper resources, training, and accessability, be a

practice that would provide many key benefits, and a fresh look at crime scenes. Introducing

professionals who are trained to look beyond the physical evidence to a crime scene could help

other professionals in the industry understand how to recognize nonphysical evidence and build a

stronger case, particuarly in the event of a homicide, robbery, or other scene that may not

immediately allow for the identification of suspects.

In summary, the article “The Value of Crime Scene and Site Visitation by Forensic

Psychologists and Psychiatrists” is a well-researched, well-thought out, and reliable source for

those in the field of forensics and crime scene investigation to consider. Application and
7

implementation of said practice – while likely easier said than done when considering limitations

and resources – would be a valuable addition to any scene. In a world where crime continuously

occurs, criminals are evolving, and technology is ever-changing, the value of a professional who

excels in analyzing and understanding what you can’t see with the human eye seems like a smart

and evolutionary move to make.

Sources

Mohandie, K. and Meloy, J., 2013. The Value of Crime Scene and Site Visitation by Forensic

Psychologists and Psychiatrists. Journal of Forensic Sciences, [online] 58(3), pp.719-

723. Available at: <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1556-4029.12135>

[Accessed 16 February 2021].

American Psychological Association. Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology, 2011,

http://www.apa.org/practice/guidelines/forensic-psychology. aspx.