1 Court Processes

Question 0

Explain a criminal court process?

Answer 0

1) Presumption of innocence
2) Prosecution bears burden of proof
3) Penalties serious and proportional
4) Defendants afforded rights

Question 1

Why do we need laws?

Answer 1

• Regulate behavior
• Resolve conflicts between people
• Balance our own desires and rights

Question 2

Explain a civil court process?

Answer 2

1) Two or more parties (plaintiff & defendant)
2) One party alleges violation of a law
3) Standard of proof is a balance of probabilities
4) Fewer rights for parties

Question 3

Which court process (civil or criminal) has the least amount of rights?

Answer 3

Civil

Question 4

What are the two court systems?

Answer 4

• Adversarial

- Inquisitorial

Question 5

Explain the adversarial system?

Answer 5

1) opposing parties present contradictory information
2) outcome is determined by judge or jury
3) judges role is to be the final arbitrator (listen to evidence)
4) lawyer’s role is to be an advocate for their client

Question 6

Explain the Inquisitorial system?

Answer 6

1) Judges hear witnesses and suspects
2) Judges order searches for further investigations
3) Goal is not prosecution. Goal is to find the truth.
4) Duty is to look for incriminating evidence
5) Lawyers

Question 7

What are the three dilemmas in the law?

Answer 7

1) Rights of individuals vs. the common good
2) Equality vs. Discretion
3) Discover the truth or resolve conflicts

Question 8

What are the two models used in the dilemma: rights of individuals vs. the common good?

Answer 8

• Due process model

- Crime control model

Question 9

Explain the due process model?

Answer 9

Places primary value on the protection of citizens, including criminal suspects, from possible abuses by the police and law enforcement.

1) Everyone is protected by the constitution
2) Miranda rights to silence and counsel
3) Rights to trial by jury
4) Many appeals are based on due processes

Question 10

What is the crime control model?

Answer 10

Seeks punishment of lawbreakers and emphasizes detection of suspects and prosecution to defendants to reduce and contain criminal activity.

Question 11

What is the dilemma: Equality vs. Discretion?

Answer 11

Equality - All people who commit the same crimes should recieve
the same consequences.
Discretion - Using judgements about the circumstances of certain
offences and responding to the offences accordingly.

Question 12

What is the dilemma: Discover truth or resolve conflicts?

Answer 12

• Adversarial system requires battles in court, but does the truth
  always come out?
• Plea bargaining is cheaper, and resolves cases quickly.

Question 13

How many cases are resolved using plea bargaining?

Answer 13

90% - 95%

Question 14

Why is plea bargaining used?

Answer 14

• Pleading guilty to a lesser charge saves time.
• Pleading guilty even if innocent avoids risking more severe
  punishment from jury.

Question 15

What is forensic psychology?

Answer 15

Any application of psychological knowledge or methods to a task faced by the legal system.

Question 16

What are the range of jobs one could get as a forensic psychologist?

Answer 16

• Professor
• Researcher
• Private Practice
• Prison Psychologist
• Policy Evaluator
• Advocate of the law

Question 17

What are the two types of Scientist/ Researcher roles in forensic psychology?

Answer 17

• Non-Clinical / Experimental

- Clinical

Question 18

What is the role of a non-clinical scientist/ researcher?

Answer 18

Research of…

• False confessions
• Eyewitness identification
• Interrogation
• Jury decision-making

Question 19

What is the role of a clinical scientist/ researcher?

Answer 19

Work with…

• Insanity reports
• Risk assessments
• Child abuse
• Domestic Violence
• Sex offenders

Question 20

What is a policy evaluator?

Answer 20

“How does policy affect society?”

• Does the death penalty work?
• Should juveniles be rehabilitated or punished?
• Should sex offenders receive treatment?
• Should the insanity defence exist?

Question 21

What is an advocate of the law? (what does it entail)

Answer 21

Supports a specific argument.
- Eg. Write a report that juveniles under the age of 18 who
commit murder should not be executed.
- The experts have to support findings impartially. They do not
support either side.

Question 22

What is the big deal about testifying?

Answer 22

Psychologists derive the truth from empirical studies whereas
judges want to establish truth based on evidence in a single case.

Question 23

What are the four criteria to decide is a psychologist can testify?

Answer 23

1. Relevance - Relevant to issue. No biases.
2. Necessity - Outside expertise needed?
3. Absence - of any exclusionary rule
4. Qualification - Relevant knowledge, skill, training, education, etc.

Question 24

What is the ‘ultimate issue’?

Answer 24

Not whether that “is he guilty?” but more “is he insane? was he abused as a child? did the police use coercive tactics to gain a confession?”

Question 25

Who determines the ultimate issue in a court room?

Answer 25

The judge or jury

Question 26

What main points did the book “whores of the court” make?

Answer 26

• Do not allow psychologists to testify
• Judge and jury should decide on issues of criminal responsibility
• We must stop pretending psychology can do what it obviously
  can not.

Question 27

In the book, “whores of the court,” what is the issue of ‘promising too much?’

Answer 27

• Some psychologists promise a level of success that they can’t
  guarantee.
• Psychologists need to acknowledge the potential error of their
  assessments.
• Psychologists should use tests that have support/ evidence for
  for their validity.

Question 28

In the book, “whores of the court,” what is the issue of ‘substituting advocacy for scientific objectivity?’

Answer 28

• Expert witnesses are hired by one side (bias)
• Some judges see experts as “hired guns”
• They should be a “friend of the court” and provide all findings
  (including conflicting findings)

Question 29

In the book, “whores of the court,” what is the issue ‘letting values overcome empirically based findings?’

Answer 29

Temptations for values to determine conclusions in a court of law.
- Psychologists must not make statements that go beyond
the science.

Question 30

In the book, “whores of the court,” what is the issue ‘unreliable forensic assesements?”

Answer 30

Temptation to be less than thorough in one’s work for the courts.
- Reliability of some forensic assessments may be questionable.

Question 31

In the book, “whores of the court,” what is the issue ‘dual relationships and competing rules?’

Answer 31

That a psychologist engages in more than one professional activity with the same person. Eg: therapy AND an assessment. Not ethical.

Question 32

What is “voir dire?”

Answer 32

A meeting to decide whether the expert’s testimony can be used in a court. (Is it reliable to the case.)

Question 33

What is a proxy?

Answer 33

Someone who can make decisions for the person if they are unable to make them on their own.