A legal analysis of Australian criminal cases involving defendants with autism spectrum disorder charged with online sexual offending.

This paper examines how the symptomology of the small number of individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) charged with online sexual offenses in Australia is established during legal arguments and conceived by the judiciary to impact legal liability and offending behavior. This study aims to provide empirical support for the proposition that judicial discourses regarding the connection between ASD and online sexual offending, including conduct related to child exploitation material (CEM), have little bearing on overall questions of criminal liability or the use of alternative penal dispositions. It does so by exploring a sample of nine recent Australian criminal cases, involving ten rulings, that examine how evidence of ASD is raised in legal arguments in ways that suggest a diagnosed condition may have contributed significantly to the alleged wrongdoing. We conclude by suggesting current Australian judicial practice requires more sensitivity to the impact of clinical factors associated with ASD in shaping alternative supervisory and non-custodial dispositions for individuals convicted of online sexual offenses.

Integrating risk and dangerousness in specific legal contexts: Clarifying concepts and justifying interventions.

Several legal interventions under the police power and parens patriae functions of the state depend partially on judgments that an individual is dangerous. Psychological research regarding risk assessment can provide relevant evidence regarding the appropriate application of these interventions. Developing, interpreting, and presenting relevant research regarding risk assessment in a manner that enhances the ability of courts to make accurate determinations of dangerousness requires clarification of the risk presented by this individual and explanation of how this person generates this risk. Testimony regarding such research can enhance the ability of the courts to make accurate judgments regarding the relationship between the risk presented and the justification for the specific intervention at issue. This article examines the justificatory functions of judgments of dangerousness for various police power and parens patriae interventions in order to clarify the manner in which psychological research and testimony can contribute to the ability of the courts to accurately assess the risk presented by an individual in making a judgment of dangerousness for a specific form of legal intervention.

Response to Disclosure as an Indicator of Competence to Stand Trial.

Ethics guidelines recommend that forensic mental health professionals begin in-person assessments by explaining the nature and purpose of the examination. To learn whether evaluees have understood and can give consent, forensic practitioners may ask evaluees to paraphrase the explanation. This article explores how a forensic evaluee's disclosure response (DR) reveals substantive information relevant to the purposes of a forensic examination. We examined archival data from 255 reports on competence to stand trial (CST) that a Midwest public sector hospital had previously submitted to courts. We classified each evaluee's DR at one of three levels: DR = yes (accurate paraphrasing), DR = no (inability to paraphrase or provide a relevant response), or DR = other (an intermediate level implying a less-than-accurate response). None of the 28 DR = no evaluees was CST, and only 7 (17%) of the 48 DR = other evaluees were CST. Thus, a CST evaluee who cannot paraphrase an examiner's explanation is likely to be incompetent to stand trial, and an examiner would need to adduce a strong argument to support any opinion to the contrary.

Effectiveness of a self-administered intervention for criminal thinking: Taking a Chance on Change.

The current study tested the effectiveness of a self-administered, cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting criminal thinking for inmates in segregated housing: Taking a Chance on Change (TCC). Participants included 273 inmates in segregated housing at state correctional institutions. Reductions in criminal thinking, as assessed by the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Styles-Simplified Version, were found in the general criminal thinking score as well as the proactive and reactive composite scores. Examination of demographic predictors of change (i.e., age, years of education, length of sentence) revealed older and more educated participants decreased in criminal thinking more than younger and less educated participants. For a subset of 48 inmates, completion of TCC was associated with significant reduction of disciplinary infractions. Reductions in reactive criminal thinking predicted reductions in disciplinary infractions. Although further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of TCC in reducing recidivism, the reductions in criminal thinking and disordered conduct suggest this is a promising intervention and mode of treatment delivery. By utilizing self-directed study at an accessible reading level, the intervention is uniquely suited to a correctional setting where staff and monetary resources are limited and security and operational issues limit the feasibility of traditional cognitive-behavioral group treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record

You can't do that! Hugo Münsterberg and misapplied psychology.

This article examines a false start in the application of psychology to the law. While there had been expert testimony from physicians in criminal and civil cases in America since the nineteenth century, forensic psychology first emerged in the early twentieth century. Following European traditions of experimental psychology, Hugo Münsterberg applied the nascent science of memory research to the assessment of witness credibility. A brilliant and popular Harvard professor, Münsterberg touted his technique of word-association to determine truth. Forensic psychology's development was stalled by resistance from within legal authorities, including John Henry Wigmore, the leading expert on evidence. However, Münsterberg was a sensation in popular media. In this article, the authors examine early attempts to import experimental psychology into the courtroom and the arguments against them. Not only were Münsterberg's findings premature, they touched on a forbidden domain for witnesses: fact finding. While sincere, he learned that the determination of truth lay within the province of juries and judges, not psychologists. Thus, the application of psychology to the law was delayed. The authors review the lessons from Münsterberg's false start and comment on developments in the admissibility of scientific testimony.

Psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision making trends.

Despite the establishment of the Daubert standard in 1993, the evidentiary criteria are rarely used as a basis for admissibility of expert witness testimony in the behavioral sciences. Ever since the promulgation of Frye and the Federal Rules of Evidence, controversy has surrounded the admissibility of expert testimony in courtrooms. There appears to be no existing uniform application of standards governing the admissibility of psychological expert witness testimony. Therefore, it is essential for the psycho-legal communities to explore judicial decision-making trends regarding psychological expert witness evidence. In this current research, psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision-making will be explored. In preliminary examination, 97 criminal and civil case summaries from the LexisNexis Academic Database involved issues of admissibility. Analyses conducted by eight trained and paired coders revealed that reliability and assistance to the trier of fact were the most often cited reasons for admissibility in courts. Consistent with prior studies, it was also found that the most applied standards for admissibility of psychological evidence were the Federal Rules of Evidence. Interestingly, while the Daubert scientific criteria for admission of scientific testimony were mentioned, they were rarely utilized. A secondary analysis of 167 civil and criminal appellate cases indicated that the reliability of testimony (18% of all cases), ability to assist the trier of fact (17%), the expert witness' qualifications (17%), and the relevance of the testimony (16%) were the most commonly cited reasons for determining admissibility. A tertiary qualitative analysis focusing on these four categories then revealed eight major trends in admissibility of psychological expert evidence.

Causality in criminal forensic and in civil disability cases: Legal and psychological comparison.

Causality (or causation) is central to every legal case, yet its underlying philosophical, legal, and psychological definitions and conceptions vary. In the criminal context, it refers to establishing the responsibility of the perpetrator of the criminal act at issue in terms of the person's mental state (mens rea), and whether the insanity defense applies. In the forensic disability and related context, it refers to whether the index event is a material or contributing cause in the multifactorial array that led to the psychological condition at issue. In both the criminal and tort contexts, the legal test is a counterfactual one. For the former, it refers to whether the outcome involved would have resulted absent the act (e.g., in cases of simultaneous criminal lethal action, which one is the but-for responsible one). For the latter, it concerns whether the claimed psychological condition would be present only because of the incident at issue. The latter event at issue is distinguished from the criminal one by its negligence compared to the voluntary intent in the criminal case. The psychological state of the perpetrator of criminal conduct can be analyzed from a biopsychosocial perspective as much as the civil one. In this regard, in the civil case, such as in forensic disability and related assessments, pre-existing, precipitating, and perpetuating factors need to be considered causally, with personal and social resilience and protective factors added, as well. In the criminal context, the same biopsychosocial model applies, but with mental competence and voluntariness added as a critical factor. The advent of neurolaw has led to use of neuroscience in court, but it risks reducing the complexity of criminal cases to unifactorial, biological models.

Attorney work product privilege trumps mandated child abuse reporting law: The case of Elijah W. v. Superior Court.

Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists are licensed in their respective professions, but they perform most of their work with attorneys in the legal arena. Both attorneys and mental health professionals place high value on confidentiality of information, reflected in the ethics of their professions and codified into laws governing their work. In psychology and psychiatry, there are some well-known exceptions to confidentiality; two primary exceptions include the mandated reporting of suspected child abuse and various "Tarasoff" duty to warn or protect laws. Generally, however, the corresponding duty for attorneys to report suspected child abuse or to warn or protect intended victims of threatened harm is not as extensive. This difference in mandated reporting responsibilities can create significant difficulties when attorneys need to retain forensic psychologists and psychiatrists to evaluate their clients, especially in criminal contexts. If the retained psychologist or psychiatrist is required to report suspected abuse or threatened harm, the attorney may be harming his or her client's legal interests by using the forensic psychologist or psychiatrist to evaluate his or her client. This article will briefly review the development of mandated reporting laws for psychologists and psychiatrists and juxtapose those with the legal and ethical requirements of confidentiality for attorneys embodied in the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product privilege. The article will then discuss the California Court of Appeals case in Elijah W. v. Superior Court, where the court addressed the issue of whether retained mental health professionals must report suspected child abuse and threatened harm to others as required by law or if they do not need to report because they come under the umbrella of the attorney work product privilege. This California court ultimately concluded that retained psychologists and psychiatrists work under the attorney work product privilege and are not required to comply with mandated reporting laws and "Tarasoff" duties.

La psicología criminalista en España: Presente y futuro / Criminal psychology in Spain: present and future

En el marco de la Psicología Jurídica, tal como se entiende en España, cabe distinguir las aplicaciones de los conocimientos de la ciencia psicológica según los diferentes momentos del proceso penal: en las dependencias policiales durante las investigaciones criminales, en los Juzgados cuando ya se han identificado y detenido a los autores de delitos, y en los Establecimientos Penitenciarios cuando resultan finalmente condenados. En este trabajo se argumenta que cuando la psicología ayuda a la investigación criminal en los primeros de los momentos del proceso judicial, las actuaciones policiales, estaremos hablando de Psicología Criminalista a dos niveles: operativo (el más propio) y estratégico (en el que pueden participar otros profesionales). Tras describir sus peculiaridades y ámbitos concretos, en analogía con los apoyos que también prestan otras ciencias criminalísticas, se explica que en España esta especialidad se desarrolla profesionalmente desde dentro de las propias instituciones policiales, con un perfil muy distinto al de la más tradicional Psicología Policial, y en estrecha colaboración con el entorno académico en lo que se refiere al desarrollo científico de sus técnicas y procedimientos

As part of legal psychology, as it is understood in Spain, we can distinguish between the applications of psychology in the different steps of the judicial process: in police stations during criminal investigations, in court when the perpetrators have already been identified and arrested, and in prisons where they are eventually sent after being convicted. This paper argues that when psychology assists the criminal investigation in the first step of the judicial process - the police activities-, we are talking about criminal psychology, at two levels: the operational level (mostly pertaining to criminal psychology) and the strategic level (shared with other areas of expertise). After describing its peculiarities and specific areas, in analogy with the support provided by other forensic sciences, here we explain that in Spain this specialty is professionally developed from within our own police forces, with a profile which is very different from the more traditional police psychology, and in close collaboration with the academic environment regarding the scientific development of techniques and procedures

Rethinking responsibility in offenders with acquired paedophilia: punishment or treatment?

This article reviews the current neurobiological literature on the aetiology of developmental and acquired paedophilia and examines what the consequences could be in terms of responsibility and treatment for the latter. Addressing the question of responsibility and punishment of offenders with acquired paedophilia from a neurobiological perspective is controversial. Consequently it is essential to avoid hasty conclusions based strictly on neurobiological abnormality justifications. This study establishes a distinction between developmental and acquired paedophilia. The article investigates whether offenders who fulfil the diagnosis of acquired paedophilia should be held fully responsible, particularly in cases where the offender's conduct appears to result from volitionally controlled behaviour that is seemingly incompatible with a neurological cause. Moreover, the article explores how responsibility can be compromised when offenders with acquired paedophilia have (partially) preserved moral knowledge despite their sexual disorder. The article then examines the option of offering mandatory treatment as an alternative to imprisonment for offenders with acquired paedophilia. Furthermore, the article addresses the ethical issues related to offering any form of quasi-coercive treatment as a condition of release. This study concludes that decisions to fully or partially excuse an individual who fulfil the diagnosis of acquired paedophilia should take all relevant information into account, both neurobiological and other environmental evidence, and should proceed on a careful case by case analysis before sentencing or offering treatment.

The prevalence of delusional disorder in prison.

Delusional disorder has important implications for forensic psychiatrists, as delusions are not infrequently related to criminal behavior. Thus, we hypothesized that delusional disorder is over-represented in correctional populations. We conducted a retrospective chart review of the electronic medical records from 2000 to 2012 of New Jersey Department of Corrections inmates who remained incarcerated as of March 2012. Potential cases of delusional disorder were initially identified by using a search for current or past diagnoses of such disorders or other diagnoses that could be misdiagnosed cases. After an initial chart review identified an inmate as having probable delusional disorder according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria, the diagnosis was confirmed by at least one concurring independent review. We estimate a point prevalence of 0.24 percent for delusional disorder in our population, which is eight times higher than that expected in the community.

Neurologic disorder and criminal responsibility.

Sufferers from neurologic and psychiatric disorders are not uncommonly defendants in criminal trials. This chapter surveys a variety of different ways in which neurologic disorder bears on criminal responsibility. It discusses the way in which a neurologic disorder might bear on the questions of whether or not the defendant acted voluntarily; whether or not he or she was in the mental state that is required for guilt for the crime; and whether or not he or she is deserving of an insanity defense. The discussion demonstrates that a just determination of whether a sufferer from a neurologic disorder is diminished in his or her criminal responsibility for harmful conduct requires equal appreciation of the nature of the relevant disorder and its impact on behavior, on the one hand, and of the legal import of facts about the psychologic mechanisms through which behavior is generated, on the other.

Duties of the Psychiatric Committee for Preventive Measures. Present situation and proposed normative changes / Zadania Komisji Psychiatrycznej do Spraw Srodków Zabezpieczajacych. Stan obecny i postulaty zmian normatywnych.

The aim of this paper is to analyze the present legal model of the Psychiatric Committee for Preventive Measures and formulate proposed changes in regulations based on research findings. In 2003 the legislator delegated the qualifying procedures to the Committee, which resulted in lengthening the time until the moment of detaining the convict in a closed facility, which may cause harm to both the convict and the society. It is proposed that the classification be performed by experts, who must be heard by the court anyway before preventive measures are decreed, with the possibility of consulting the Committee in difficult or doubtful cases, if needed. Most tasks of the Committee, however, should be related to exercising control and to do this, it is necessary for the Committee to liaise with the court's penitentiary supervisors.

Is Miss Sympathy a credible defendant allging intimate partner violence in a trial for murde

Current research has postulated that judicial inferencing and judgement-making are subject to biased appraisals. This study assessed the factors reported in the literature associated to the appraisal of criminality in a mock case of a battered woman standing trial for murdering her husband, and who pleaded legitimate selfdefence in response to an instance of intimate partner violence. A nationwide sample of 169 police officers from different cities in Spain freely volunteered to participate in the study. Using a mock trial design, the defendant's prototypicality (prototypical vs. nonprototypical), and physical attractiveness (attractive vs. unattractive) were manipulated. Participants were required to assess the criminality (credibility, responsibility, and controllability) of a battered woman accused of murdering her husband, and who alleged legitimate self-defence in response to an incident of intimate partner violence. The results showed that a defendant perceived as the prototype of a battered woman was judged as having less or no control of the situation; physical attractiveness increased the perception of the defendant's responsibility in committing the crime; and an interaction between prototypicality and attractiveness in assigning credibility to the defendant's testimony. Moreover, hostile sexism mediated the relationship between the defendant's prototypicality and controllability. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for judicial judgement making in cases of battered women who kill their aggressors(AU)

La investigación ha puesto de manifiesto que el proceso de inferencia y toma de decisiones, es sensible a múltiples sesgos que pueden afectar tales juicios o valoraciones. La presente investigación trata de analizar algunos de los posibles factores que la literatura ha relacionado con la valoración de la criminalidad, en un caso en que se juzga a una mujer que ha matado a su marido y que alega, en su defensa, haber sido víctima de violencia de género. Participaron en el estudio 169 policías procedentes de distintas ciudades españolas, de manera voluntaria y anónima. Mediante un diseño de escenarios en el que se presentaba un caso judicial ficticio, se manipuló la prototipicidad de la acusada (prototípica vs. no prototípica) y su atractivo físico (atractiva vs. no atractiva). Los participantes tenían que valorar la criminalidad (credibilidad, responsabilidad y controlabilidad) de una mujer, que alegaba haber sido víctima de violencia de género, acusada de haber matado a su marido. Los resultados mostraron que cuando se presenta a la acusada como prototipo de mujer maltratada, se le atribuía un menor control de la situación, que el atractivo físico aumentaba la percepción de responsabilidad de la acusada en el delito cometido; y una interacción entre el atractivo físico y la prototipicidad en la evaluación de la credibilidad de la acusada. Asimismo, el sexismo hostil de los participantes actuaba como variable mediadora en la relación entre prototipicidad y la percepción de controlabilidad de la acusada. Estos resultados tienen implicaciones para la formación de juicios sobre víctimas de violencia de género que asesinen a su agresor y para la atención a las denunciantes de violencia de género que son discutidos(AU)

Demographic, criminogenic, and psychiatric factors that predict competency restoration.

Previous research has investigated the characteristics of competent and incompetent defendants and restorable and nonrestorable defendants. However, less is known about the influence of current treatment variables and other systemic factors on restorability. In the present study, we sought to examine the impact of demographic, criminogenic, historical clinical, and current treatment variables on the restorability and length of stay (LOS) of incompetent defendants. We reviewed the records of 71 male patients who had been court ordered for competency restoration and subsequently discharged from a maximum-security forensic hospital. Results indicated that nonrestorable patients had more prior hospitalizations, incarcerations, and episodes of incompetence, had lower level charges, were diagnosed with a psychotic and cognitive disorder, were prescribed more medications, and had lower global assessment of functioning (GAF) scores. Nonrestorable patients were hospitalized nearly twice as long as those eventually found competent, and patients with lower IQs and lower GAFs and who spent more days on special observations had longer LOS.

Commentary: Jail-based competency restoration.

Many factors influence restoration of competence to stand trial: age, IQ, severity of mental illness, criminal history, treatment history, and others. This commentary poses the question of whether competency to stand trial is also influenced by the setting in which restoration treatment occurs. Jail-based competency-restoration programs, which are in their infancy and have yet to produce large-scale data demonstrating their efficacy, are examined. Several factors related to jail-based restoration are considered: choosing the right candidates for the program, impact of treatment in a punitive setting, ability to maintain separation between treaters and forensic evaluators, procedures for involuntary medication, aggregation of incompetent defendants in regional jails, effect on malingering, and cost savings.

Commentary: Competency restoration research--complicating an already complex process.

Predicting restorability in individuals found not competent to stand trial is an enduring focus of interest among forensic clinicians and academicians. In our commentary, we suggest that to understand this area even more comprehensively, we must look further. We must build on existing research on fitness to stand trial, move beyond diagnosis and a binary competence variable, and include the complex interplay between symptoms and fitness-related capacities that may be associated with lack of adjudicative competence and challenges to restorability.

Therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health courts for Maori.

For Maori, indigenous peoples of New Zealand, the Treaty of Waitangi required the Crown to protect all the treasures of Maori. This has been taken to include health and cultural concepts, values and practices. Despite this guarantee studies indicate that half of all Maori will develop a mental disorder within their lifetime. Failure by the Crown to provide adequate services has led to those who have already developed a mental illness more predisposed to engage in behaviour that the law regards as criminal. This article suggests that the Treaty principles such as partnership, active protection and participation place an onus upon the Crown to protect and provide for the health needs and cultural identity of Maori. It is proposed that a Mental Health Court underpinned by therapeutic jurisprudence can provide a solution.