Criminal PsychologyCriminal Psychology

Chapter 5Chapter 5

Insanity and CompetencyInsanity and Competency

TalbotTalbot

Kellogg Community CollegeKellogg Community College

InsanityInsanity Insanity is a legal term.Insanity is a legal term.

To be determined by the triers of truth.To be determined by the triers of truth. The legal definition may vary from The legal definition may vary from

jurisdiction to jurisdiction.jurisdiction to jurisdiction. An assessment for insanity attempts to An assessment for insanity attempts to

evaluate the person’s mental state at evaluate the person’s mental state at the time of the offense.the time of the offense.

Insanity v. Psychosis

Psychosis – A lack of contact with reality. It may include both hallucinations and delusions.

Can one be psychotic and not insane? John Hinckley, 1981 Theodore Kaczynski, 1998 John Salvi. 1996

Mens Rea (Guilty Mind) Guilt requires not only an illegal act but also the

state of mind reflecting one’s awareness of the act’s implications.

NGRINGRI M’Naghten Rule (Cognitive Test of Insanity)M’Naghten Rule (Cognitive Test of Insanity)

1.1. The defendant was suffering from a defect of reason The defendant was suffering from a defect of reason from a disease of the mind.from a disease of the mind.

2.2. As a result, the defendant did not know the nature As a result, the defendant did not know the nature and quality of the act he was doing.and quality of the act he was doing.

3.3. As a result, the defendant did not know that what he As a result, the defendant did not know that what he was doing was wrong.was doing was wrong.

ProblemsProblems The volitional aspect of insanity. “I knew it was The volitional aspect of insanity. “I knew it was

wrong, but God told me to do it so I had to!”wrong, but God told me to do it so I had to!” Irresistible Impulse Exemption.Irresistible Impulse Exemption.

NGRINGRI

Results of an NGRI determination.Results of an NGRI determination. Psychiatric hospitalPsychiatric hospital JailJail PrisonPrison

Length of incarceration or Length of incarceration or admission?admission?

NGRINGRI

Results of an NGRI determination.Results of an NGRI determination. Psychiatric hospitalPsychiatric hospital JailJail PrisonPrison

Length of incarceration or Length of incarceration or admission?admission?

NGRINGRI Results of an NGRI determination.Results of an NGRI determination.

Psychiatric hospitalPsychiatric hospital JailJail PrisonPrison

Length of incarceration or Length of incarceration or admission?admission?

As long as they, in the judgment of the As long as they, in the judgment of the courts, believe the person continues to courts, believe the person continues to display the presence of serious display the presence of serious psychiatric disorders. psychiatric disorders.

Guilty But Mentally ILL (GBMI)

Indicates the presence of mental illness and the presence of mens rea.

Unlike NGRI (a defense), GBMI is a verdict. How might this occur?

The results of such a verdict? Hospital Prison Hospital Prison

Case ExampleCase Example An individual with schizophrenia is currently

receiving both psychiatric and intensive outpatient social psychological treatment. In addition, he is living in an Adult Foster Care home. Although demonstrating no positive symptoms of the illness, he does exhibit negative symptoms.

Crime: The individual walks into a convenience store near the AFC. He holds his finger in his coat and points it at the young girl stating, “I need you to give me a carton of cigarettes.” The counter girl asks if he is going to pay for them and making the finger in his coat pocket more obvious, asks “I do not need to pay for them, do I?” The clerk answers “no” and the man leaves.

Assessing SanityAssessing Sanity Concerns for the PsychologistConcerns for the Psychologist

The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of states like Michigan).states like Michigan).

In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide specific opinions on that specific case and can only answer specific opinions on that specific case and can only answer general questions.general questions.

Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be pathological. (Jeffrey Dahmer)pathological. (Jeffrey Dahmer)

Jeffrey Dahmer (1992)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N4E8OIgnIAhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N4E8OIgnIAhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc4rlaSl2DYhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc4rlaSl2DY

Killed and dismembered at least 17 young men over a 10 year period.

Some bodies cannibalized/ dismembered and some were mummified in order to remain companions.

Use of alcohol prior to murders. At times, years between murders. 6 expert witnesses. “If this isn’t mental illness, I don’t know what is.” Dr. Fred S. Berlin

Assessing SanityAssessing Sanity Concerns for the PsychologistConcerns for the Psychologist

The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of states The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of states like Michigan).like Michigan).

In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide specific In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide specific opinions on that specific case and can only answer general questions.opinions on that specific case and can only answer general questions.

Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be pathological. (Jeffrey Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be pathological. (Jeffrey Dahmer)Dahmer)

Likely to face a stiff and critical cross-examination.Likely to face a stiff and critical cross-examination. The length of time since the offense occurred.The length of time since the offense occurred. Personal Biases.Personal Biases. Limiting themselves to the boundaries of their license.Limiting themselves to the boundaries of their license.

Ultimate issue or Ultimate opinion testimonyUltimate issue or Ultimate opinion testimony Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b)Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b)

No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state of condition of No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state of condition of the defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to the defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an element of the crime charged or of the defense thereto. constituting an element of the crime charged or of the defense thereto. Such ultimate issues are matters for the trier of the fact alone.Such ultimate issues are matters for the trier of the fact alone.

Ultimate IssueUltimate Issue

The final question which must be The final question which must be determined by the court.determined by the court. Guilt v. innocence.Guilt v. innocence. Sanity v. insanity.Sanity v. insanity.

Assessing SanityAssessing Sanity Concerns for the PsychologistConcerns for the Psychologist

The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of states like The other side is likely to have their own experts (outside of states like Michigan).Michigan).

In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide specific opinions In some jurisdictions, the expert witness cannot provide specific opinions on that specific case and can only answer general questions.on that specific case and can only answer general questions.

Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be pathological. (Jeffrey Believing that if a behavior is atypical, it must be pathological. (Jeffrey Dahmer)Dahmer)

Likely to face a stiff and critical cross-examination.Likely to face a stiff and critical cross-examination. The length of time since the offense occurred.The length of time since the offense occurred. Personal Biases.Personal Biases. Limiting themselves to the boundaries of their license.Limiting themselves to the boundaries of their license.

Ultimate issue or Ultimate opinion testimonyUltimate issue or Ultimate opinion testimony Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b)Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b)

No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state of condition of the No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state of condition of the defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to whether the defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an element of the crime charged or of the defense thereto. Such ultimate issues element of the crime charged or of the defense thereto. Such ultimate issues are matters for the trier of the fact alone.are matters for the trier of the fact alone.

MalingueringMalinguering

Malingering

DSM – IV – TR This term applies to individuals who This term applies to individuals who

intentionally pretend to have intentionally pretend to have symptoms of mental or physical symptoms of mental or physical illness to achieve financial or other illness to achieve financial or other gain or to avoid criminal conviction gain or to avoid criminal conviction or unwanted duty. They may also or unwanted duty. They may also malingermalinger to facilitate escape from to facilitate escape from captivity or incarceration.captivity or incarceration.

MalingeringMalingering

At arrest or commission of the crime.At arrest or commission of the crime. Influence the issue of competency.Influence the issue of competency. Influence the issue of sanity.Influence the issue of sanity. Influence the issue of Influence the issue of

environment/holding.environment/holding. Influence the issue of sentencing.Influence the issue of sentencing.

Assessing CompetencyAssessing Competency A person’s ability to understand the A person’s ability to understand the

court’s proceedings, the nature of court’s proceedings, the nature of the charges against them & their the charges against them & their ability to assist in their own ability to assist in their own defense.defense.

Competency to plead guilty.Competency to plead guilty. Competency to stand trial.Competency to stand trial. Use of competency screening tests.Use of competency screening tests. CST, Competency Assessment CST, Competency Assessment

Instrument, Georgia Court Instrument, Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), CAST - MR.Competency Test (GCCT), CAST - MR.

Competency Screening Test

When I go to court the lawyer will… The way a court trial is decided… When they say a man is innocent until

proven guilty… When I think of being sent to prison, I …

Scored 2 pts (competent), 1 pt (marginally competent, O pts (not competent).

Score below 20 indicates the need of a more comprehensive evaluation.

Assessing CompetencyAssessing Competency A person’s ability to understand the A person’s ability to understand the

court’s proceedings, the nature of court’s proceedings, the nature of the charges against them & their the charges against them & their ability to assist in their own ability to assist in their own defense.defense.

Competency to plead guilty.Competency to plead guilty. Competency to stand trial.Competency to stand trial. Use of competency screening tests.Use of competency screening tests. CST, Competency Assessment CST, Competency Assessment

Instrument, Georgia Court Instrument, Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), CAST - MR.Competency Test (GCCT), CAST - MR.

Mental RetardationMental Retardation DSM – IV – TR criteria for MRDSM – IV – TR criteria for MR.. A. Significantly subaverage intellectual functioning: an IQ of approximately A. Significantly subaverage intellectual functioning: an IQ of approximately

70 or below on an individually administered IQ test (for infants, a clinical 70 or below on an individually administered IQ test (for infants, a clinical judgment of significantly subaverage intellectual functioning). judgment of significantly subaverage intellectual functioning). 

B. Concurrent deficits or impairments in present adaptive functioning (i.e., B. Concurrent deficits or impairments in present adaptive functioning (i.e., the person's effectiveness in meeting the standards expected for his or her the person's effectiveness in meeting the standards expected for his or her age by his or her cultural group) in at least two of the following areas: age by his or her cultural group) in at least two of the following areas: communication, self-care, home living, social/interpersonal skills, use of communication, self-care, home living, social/interpersonal skills, use of community resources, self-direction, functional academic skills, work, community resources, self-direction, functional academic skills, work, leisure, health, and safety. leisure, health, and safety. 

C. The onset is before age 18 years. C. The onset is before age 18 years.  CodeCode based on degree of severity reflecting level of intellectual impairment: based on degree of severity reflecting level of intellectual impairment: 317 Mild Mental Retardation:317 Mild Mental Retardation: IQ level 50-55 to approximately 70  IQ level 50-55 to approximately 70  318.0 Moderate Mental Retardation:318.0 Moderate Mental Retardation: IQ level 35-40 to 50-55  IQ level 35-40 to 50-55  318.1 Severe Mental Retardation:318.1 Severe Mental Retardation: IQ level 20-25 to 35-40  IQ level 20-25 to 35-40  318.2 Profound Mental Retardation:318.2 Profound Mental Retardation: IQ level below 20 or 25 319 Mental IQ level below 20 or 25 319 Mental

Retardation, Severity Unspecified: when there is strong presumption of Retardation, Severity Unspecified: when there is strong presumption of Mental Retardation but the person's intelligence is untestable by standard Mental Retardation but the person's intelligence is untestable by standard teststests