Forensic Psychology

What is forensic psychology?

 Forensic psychology is the intersection between psychology

and the criminal justice system.

 Wrightsman (2001) regards forensic psychology as “any

application of psychological knowledge or methods to a
task faced by the legal system”.
 Forensic psychology is referred to as application of
psychological knowledge and methods to both civil and
criminal legal questions
Towards a functional
definition
 Hess (2006) proposed a three part functional definition
of forensic psychology by describing three ways that the
psychology and law intersect including
 Psychology in the law
 For example, the psychological causes behind the
commitment of a crime
 Psychology of the law
 The use of psychological methods and theories to assess
factors that contribute toward the rising prevalence of
different forms of crimes around the world
 Psychology by the law
 Use of different standards and legal procedures to assess the
state of mind of a criminal
 History of Forensic Psychology
•American psychologists at turn of 20th
C. relatively disinterested in applying
research topics to the law.
•Throughout early 1900’s the legal
system resisted intrusion by
psychologists into courtrooms.
 History of Forensic Psychology
 James McKeen Cattell – Studied the psychology of eye witness testimony
 “Measurements of the accuracy of recollection” a research paper by James
Mckeen Catell
 Alfred Binet’s work on eye witness testimony of children and the role of
suggestive questioning techniques.
 The “Reality Experiment” by William Stern and the examination of
suggestibility of witnesses-1901 and launched the first journal entitled
“Contributions to the Psychology of Testimony”
 Hugo Münsterberg – Father of Forensic Psychology
 In 1896 Albert von Schrenck-Notzing stated that pretrial coverage
clouds the minds of witnesses
History of Forensic Psychology

 In 1896, a psychologist by the name of Albert von

Schrenck-Notzing testified at a murder trial about the
effects of suggestibility on eye witness testimony
 the case of rape and murder of three women and the
concept of “retroactive memory falsification”
History of Forensic Psychology

 In 1908, Munsterberg published his book On the Witness

Stand, advocating the use of psychology in legal matters

 William Marston – Testified at the trial that established the

standard for expert witnesses.
 In 1917, Marston developed the first modern polygraph
History of Forensic Psychology

 William Marston in 1917 stated that systolic blood pressure

strongly correlated with lying. This discovery led to the
development of the polygraph or the lie detector
 Marston testified in 1923 in the case of Frye vs. United
States. This case is significant because it established the
precedent for the use of expert witnesses in courts.
 The Frye Standard……
 The Daubert standard
Frye and Daubert Standards

 The Frye standard, Frye test, or general acceptance test is

a test to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It
provides that expert -opinion based on a scientific technique is
admissible only where the technique is generally accepted as
reliable in the relevant scientific community.
 Daubert Standard used by a trial judge to make a preliminary
assessment of whether an expert’s scientific testimony is based on
reasoning or methodology that is scientifically valid and can
properly be applied to the facts at issue. Under this standard,
the factors that may be considered in determining whether the
methodology is valid are: (1) whether the theory or technique in
question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been
subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential
error rate; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards
controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted
widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community.
History of Forensic Psychology

 Prior to World War II, psychologists used to testify in a

few cases. In comparison, medical specialists were credited
as being more reliable
 People VS. Hawthorne Case in 1940 was a landmark
incidence when a new criteria was set for expert witnesses
i.e. the courts ruled that the standard for expert witnesses
was in the extent of knowledge of a subject, not in whether
or not the witness had a medical degree.
History of Forensic Psychology

 In the landmark 1954 case of Brown vs. Board of

Education, several psychologists testified for both the
plaintiffs and the defendants.
 Later, the courts gave support to psychologists serving as
mental illness experts in the case of Jenkins vs. United
States.
 Go this link and write a summary of the case and the
decision that was taken by the court.
 https://www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/jenkins.aspx
 What Forensic Psychology is NOT.
Forensic Scientist Forensic Psychiatrist
 Analyze, compare,  Apply Psychiatry to
identify & the Law
interpret physical  Expert witnesses in
evidence court
 Identify evidence  Application of
& link it to the medical treatment
suspect, victim & in forensic settings
crime scene
 Who Employs Forensic Psychologists?
 Federal, state & local government & facilities:
i.e. prisons, jails, police departments,
corrections facilities, probation and parole,
military, etc.
 Treatment facilities: i.e. drug/chemical
rehabilitation, short/long term residential
facilities, counseling centers, mental
hospitals, etc.
 Courts, attorneys and legal advocacy groups
 Self employed, private practice & consultants
 Teaching: colleges/universities w/ courses in
psychology &/or criminal justice
 Subfields of Forensic Psychology
 Clinical-Forensic Psychology
Very similar to clinical psychology. Clients here are not only
suffering from some type of mental problem, but their
issues are of importance to legal decision making as well.
 Developmental Psychology
Deals w/ juveniles, the elderly, and the law. Focus on
policy making rather than treatment of those with mental
problems e.g. determining the age of criminal responsibility
 Social Psychology
Concerned with how jurors interact and arrive at a group
decision.
 Cognitive Psychology
Closely associated w/social psychology subfield, but looks
more into how people make decisions in legal cases.
 Criminal Investigative Psychology
Police psychology, criminal profiling and psychological
autopsies. Experts may choose to conduct research and/or
work closely in analyzing the minds of criminal suspects
Clinical Forensic Psychology
 Jury Selection
 Consultation with Lawyers
 Expert Witness
 Competency Assessment
 Insanity Assessment
 Lethality Assessment
 Custody Assessment
 Researcher
 Law Enforcement Screening
 Forensic Psychologists in the Court
 Psychologists and Psychiatrists
testify in an estimated 8% of all
federal civil trials
 Mental health professionals
participate in as many as a
1,000,000 cases per year.
 Consulting with Lawyers
Witness Preparation
 Help witness present testimony
better without changing the facts
 Manner of presentation, associated
emotions, preparation for being a
witness in a courtroom, etc
Convincing the Jury
 Help attorneys in way they present
cases and evidence to jurors
 Help establish presentation of
opening and closing statements
 Jury Selection

 Lawyers hire psychologists as jury selection consultants

 Psychologist use empirically-based procedures to select jurors
 Focus groups
 Shadow juries
 Systematic rating of prospective jurors
 Surveys of community to detect bias
 Expert Witness
Must help the court understand and
evaluate evidence or determine a fact
at issue
Experts can by asked to testify by the
court or by counsel of either defendant
or plaintiff
Judge decides if an expert witness can
claim expert status
Areas Psychologists Testify as an Expert
Witness
 Commitment to mental hospitals  Predicting dangerousness
 Child custody issues  Rights of a mentally disabled person in
 an institution
Offender Treatment Programs
 Competency to stand trial
 Release from involuntary
confinement  Criminal Responsibility (Insanity
 Defense)
Jury Selection
 Battered Women
 Criminal Profiling
 Advice to attorneys regarding
factors that will affect jurors’
behaviors
Courts & Forensic
Psychology
Family Court
Civil Court
Criminal Court
 Family Court
 Child Custody Evaluations
 Visitation Risk Assessments
 Grandparent Visitation Evaluations
 Mediation of Parental Conflicts about Children
 Child Abuse Evaluations
 Adoption Readiness Evaluations
 Development of Family Reunification Plans
 Evaluations to Assess Termination of Parental
Rights
 Civil Court
 Personal Injury Evaluations
 IME Second Opinion Evaluations
 Assessment of Emotional Factors in Sexual Harassment and
Discrimination
 Worker's Compensation Evaluations
 Civil Competency Evaluations
 Psychological Autopsies
 Criminal Court
 Evaluations of Juveniles accused of criminal acts
 Juvenile Pre-sentencing Evaluations
 Juvenile Probation Evaluations
 Juvenile Waiver Evaluations
 Evaluating the Credibility of Child Witnesses
 Assessment of Juvenile and Adult Sexual Offenders
 Competency and Diminished Capacity Evaluations
 Adult Pre-sentencing Evaluations.
 Insanity vs. Competence
 Relates  Competence refers
to the
defendants mental exclusively to the
state at the time defendants mental
the offense occurs. abilities at the time
of the proceeding.
 Insanity Defense

An insanity defense is based on the theory that

most people can choose to follow the law;
But a few select persons cannot be held
accountable because mental disease or
disability deprives them of the ability to
make a rational/voluntary choice
 What is Insanity?
Mental illness of such a severe nature
that a person…
 cannot distinguish fantasy from reality,
 cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or


is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior.
 Legal Standards of Insanity
 McNaughton Rule
States that, in order to establish insanity,
it must be proven that at the time of a
crime, the accused had a mental defect
(i.e. such as a mental disease) so that
she/he did/could not know the nature or
quality of their crime at the time of
offense--or if the accused did not know that
what she/he did was wrong.
 The Durham Rule
States that the accused is not criminally
responsible if her/his unlawful conduct is or
was the product of mental disease or
defect.
 The Original test
 The insanity defense traces its roots back to the 1843 when Englishman Daniel
McNaughton shot and killed the secretary of the British Prime Minister,
believing that the Prime Minister was conspiring against him.
 The court acquitted McNaughton "by reason of insanity," and
 He was placed in a mental institution for the rest of his life.
 However, the case caused a public uproar, and Queen Victoria ordered the
court to develop a stricter test for insanity.

The McNaughton Test
also called the "right-wrong test"
 a person was not criminally responsible if at the time of the crime, he did
not know the nature of the act or that it was wrong.
The Jury was required to answer two
questions:
1. Did the defendant know what he was doing when he committed the crime?
2. Did the defendant understand that his actions were wrong?
 This test allowed a prosecutor to prove sanity easily by simply showing a
defendant understood the moral consequences of an action; mental illness did
not matter.
AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE (ALI) TEST
Under the ALI test the defendant must prove by a pre-ponderance of the
evidence of the time of the crime because of a mental disorder, he lacked
substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to
conform his conduct to the requirements of law
This test is more favorable to defendants because it excuses a defendant of
whether his cognitive or volitional capacity was substantially impaired; it
doesn’t require complete impairment.
Competency to Stand Trial
To determine a suspect’s competency to stand trial, the following
factors are considered
1. To appreciate their presence in relation to time, place, and
things.
2. To appreciate that they are in a court of justice, charged with
a criminal offense, with a judge on the bench, a prosecutor who
will try to convict them of a criminal charge, and a lawyer who will
undertake to defend them against that charge.
3. To appreciate that they will be expected to tell their lawyer
to the best of their mental ability the circumstances, the facts
surrounding them at the time and place where the offense is
alleged to have been committed.
4. To appreciate that there is, or will be, a jury present to pass
upon evidence adduced as to their guilt or innocence.
5. For memory sufficient to relate those things in their own
personal manner.
Competency Screening
Instruments
 Competency Screening Test (CST)
 employs hypothetical situations in a sentence completion format
to identify defendants who might require a fuller, hospital-based
competency evaluation
 However, studies of the CST found problems in terms of
classification accuracy and utility (Nicholson, Robertson,
Johnson, & Jensen, 1988; Roesch & Golding, 1980).
 Competency to Stand Trial Assessment Instrument (CAI).
 The CAI, a rating scale of 13 functions derived from the legal literature and
clinical/courtroom experience, has generally been used as an interview
guide rather than as a psychometric instrument (Schreiber, 1978).
Important Determinants of the
Competency to Stand Trial
1. Appraisal of available legal defenses
2. Unmanageable behavior
3. Quality of relating to attorney
4. Planning of legal strategy, including guilty pleas to lesser charges where pertinent
5. Appraisal of the role of persons involved in a trial
6. Understanding of court procedure
7. Appreciation of charges
8. Appreciation of the range and nature of possible penalties
9. Appraisal of the likely outcome
10. Capacity to disclose to attorney the available pertinent facts surrounding the offense
11. Capacity to realistically challenge prosecution witnesses
12. Capacity to testify relevantly
13. Self-defeating versus self-serving motivation (legal sense)
 Famous Cases
John Hinckley
 Shot President Ronald Reagan, in front of television cameras -- but declared “not
guilty by reason of insanity” and sent to a mental institution.
 Hinckley
 Developed an obsession of Jodi Foster,
who played a child prostitute in the
movie Taxi Driver
 Followed her to Yale University and
stalked her for a short time, slipping
poems and messages under her door
and repeatedly contacting her by
telephone.
 Hinckley
 Failed to develop meaningful contact with Foster.
 Developed such plots as hijacking an airplane and committing suicide in front of
her to gain her attention.
 Settled on a scheme to win her over by assassinating the president (just like the
main character in Taxi Driver).
 Hinckley
Followed Jimmy Carter for a while until
arrested in Nashville for firearms
charges.
He returned home once again.
Despite psychiatric treatment for
depression, his mental health did not
improve.
 Hinckley
 As of 1981 started to target newly-elected president,
Ronald Reagan
 Started viewing Lee Harvey Oswald (Kennedy
assassin) as hero
 Hinckley
 Just prior to Hinckley's failed attempt on Reagan's life, he wrote to Foster
 "Over the past seven months I've left you dozens of poems, letters and love
messages in the faint hope that you could develop an interest in me. Although
we talked on the phone a couple of times I never had the nerve to simply
approach you and introduce myself. [...] the reason I'm going ahead with this
attempt now is because I cannot wait any longer to impress you."
 Hinckley
 On March 30, 1981, Hinckley fired a .22 caliber
Röhm RG-14 revolver six times at President
Reagan, as he left the Hilton Hotel in Washington,
D.C. after addressing an AFL-CIO conference.
 Wounded press secretary James Brady, police
officer Thomas Delahanty and Secret Service agent
Timothy McCarthy.
 Bullet ricochet off the side of the limousine and hit
President Reagan in the chest.
 All victims survived, but Brady -- hit in the right
side of the head -- endured a long recuperation
period and remained paralyzed on the left side of
his body.
 Hinckley
 At the trial in 1982, charged with 13
offenses
 Hinckley was found not guilty by reason
of insanity on June 21.
 The defense psychiatric reports found
him to be insane while the prosecution
reports declared him legally sane.
 Hinckley was confined at St. Elizabeth's
Hospital in Washington, D.C.
How can we tell if someone is insane?
Determining Insanity

 A criminal defendant who is found legally insane

(or "not guilty by reason of insanity") cannot be
held accountable for crimes resulting from the
condition. After all, prosecutors are required to
show a defendant's willful intent in order to
prove guilt for most criminal charges. State
courts use one of several established legal tests to
determine whether someone was insane at the
time of the incident or simply faking it. These
include the M'Naghten Rule; the Irresistible
Impulse test; the Durham Rule; and the Model
Penal Code test.
M'Naghten Rule

 The M'Naghten Rule (or test) focuses on whether a criminal

defendant knew the nature of the crime or understood right from
wrong at the time it was committed
 Examples of Insanity Using the M'Naghten Rule
 A man murdered his wife and daughter, and then waited calmly for
the police to arrive. Three mental health experts testified that he
was too psychologically ill to understand that his criminal acts
were wrong. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity and
sentenced to 10 years in a mental health facility.
 A woman with severe schizophrenia is charged with assault and
battery after attacking her next door neighbor with a shovel. She
claims the neighbor was actually a demon who was trying to
harvest her soul. She was found not guilty by reason of insanity
after the court determined that she failed to understand the nature
of her actions.
Model Penal Code Test

 Using the MPC test, a criminal defendant must be found

not guilty by reason of insanity if he is diagnosed with a
relevant mental defect (for example, severe mental
retardation or schizophrenia disorder) and at the time
of the incident was unable to either:
 1. Appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or
 2. Conform his conduct to the requirements of the law
Example of Legal Insanity Under
the MPC Test

 John, who has been diagnosed with severe schizophrenia, was

charged with assault and battery after beating up a stranger at a
bus stop. As a result of his condition, he occasionally hears
voices urging him attack certain individuals. John knows it was
wrong to attack this person, but claims he was unable to
control the impulse to do so.
 A court using the MPC test likely would find him not guilty by
reason of insanity because he was unable to conform his
conduct to the law prohibiting assault and battery.
Irresistible Impulse Test

 It encompasses not only whether defendants know right from

wrong but also whether they could control their impulses to
commit wrong-doing.
 In jurisdictions that use or incorporate the Irresistible Impulse
Test as a criminal defense, defendants typically must present
sufficient evidence to prove:
 1. The existence of mental illness; and
 2. That the mental illness caused the inability to control one's
actions or conform one's conduct to the law.
Durham Rule

 According to the Durham Rule, a criminal defendant

cannot be convicted of a crime if the act was the result
of a mental disease or defect at the time of the
incident. It does not require a medical diagnosis of
mental illness or disorder.
Terms Commonly Used in
Court Settings
 First degree murder
 Second degree murder
 Voluntary manslaughter
 Involuntary manslaughter
 Plaintiff
 Defendant
 Trial
 Hearing
 Actus Reus
 Mens Rea
 Civil law
 Criminal law
 Amicus Brief
 Brandeis brief
 Subpoena duces tecum
Mens Rea and Actus Reus

 A fundamental principle of Criminal Law

is that a crime consists of both a mental and a physical el
ement
 Mens rea, a.person's awareness of the fact that his or her
conduct is criminal, is the mental element, and actus reu
s, the act itself, is the physical element.
 Means Rea (guilty mind)-the mental element
 Actus reus (guilty act)-the physical element
 The actus reus in criminal law consists of all elements
of a crime other than the state of mind of the
defendant. In particular, actus reus may consist
of: conduct, result, a state of affairs or an omission.
Civil Law and Criminal Law

 Civil law deals with the disputes between individuals,

organizations, or between the two, in which compensation
is awarded to the victim.
 Criminal law is the body of law that deals with crime and
the legal punishment of criminal offenses.
 Main difference is that in criminal law, the person, if found
guilty, is punished by incarceration. In comparison, in civil
law, the losing party has to reimburse the plaintiff
 Another difference is the “burden of proof” In case of
criminal law, the burden of proof lies with the government
in order to prove that the defendant is guilty. On the other
hand, in case of civil law the burden of proof first lies with
the plaintiff and then with the defendant to refute the
evidence provided by the plaintiffs.
 “presumption of innocence”