ch 8 + 10 (final) Flashcards
(41 cards)
describe Sean Clifton’s case. what happened to him?
-stabbed + almost killed Julie Bouvier
-history of mental illness
-sought treatment prior to attack, but was unsuccessful
-found NCR, spent time in a psychiatric facility + released to live in the community
-victim has publicly forgiven him
what is psycholegal ability? what are the 2 primary issues in its assessment?
-mental capacity to understand + participate in legal proceedings:
-comprehension of legal concepts
-understanding of legal consequences
-ability to communicate effectively with legal professionals
-does this person have a mental disorder?
-does the mental disorder cause psycholegal impairments?
what is the legal definition of mental disorder?
-any illness, disorder, or abnormal condition that impairs the human mind + its fnxing (excluding self induced states caused by alc/drugs)
what is competence / competence to stand trial (CST)?
-competence: whether an indiv has sufficient present ability to meaningfully participate in + perform necessary personal / legal fnxns
-diff types - eg competency to waive an attorney, to plead guilty, confess etc
-CST = the mental state of the accused AT THE TIME of the trial
what is looked at for a person to be found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD)? what is the principle behind this?
-defendant’s mental state at the time of the alleged offense
-person must be considered responsible for behavior to be convicted
who proves the defendant is NCRMD and how?
-prosecution must prove:
-actus reus: physical act of crime
-mens rea: mental capacity + intent to commit the crime
how much does having psychosis affect CST?
-psychosis is an important factor; increases likelihood accused will be found unfit
-not the only factor; ~50% of defendants diagnosed w psychosis are found fit to stand trial
what is the standard for CST in the US?
-Dusky v United States (1960): must be able to consult rationally w counsel; must understand the legal implications of the charges
-Indiana v Edwards (2008): higher std than Dusky is needed to waive counsel; must meet std of knowing, voluntary, and intelligence
who is colin ferguson?
-Ferguson had paranoid delusions, shot 25 train passengers
-despite clear issues of CST, insisted on representing himself
-arguments were at times nonsensical, incoherent, delusional
-competency was never challenged
who can raise the issue of CST? who proves it?
-any party, at any stage
-the party who raises it has the burden of proving it
what is the criteria for determining “unfit to stand trial” in Ca?
-must be a mental disorder that causes the accused to be unable to conduct a defense
-could be any of the following:
a) Unable to understand the nature / object of the proceedings
b) Unable to understand the possible consequences of the proceedings
c) Unable to communicate w counsel
what is Canada’s limited cognitive capacity test? (1992) what are the requirements of it?
the test for determining the accused’s ability to communicate with counsel
→ to effectively communicate w lawyer, must be able to recall necessary details of the offence in a way that enables counsel to mount a defence
who can evaluate CST in Ca?
-In Ca, “medical practitioner or any other person who has been designated by the Attorney General as being qualified to conduct an assessment of the mental condition of the accused”
-ie, a psychiatrist
describe the Fitness Interview Test-Revised (FIT-R; Roesch et al); give an example of questions from each section
-semi structured interview + rating scale for assessing fitness to stand trial; 16 items divided into 3 sections:
1.Understanding the nature + severity of charges
→ eg what are you charged with?; how serious is that charge?; do you think that people might be afraid of you because of what you’re charged with?
- Appraisal of available legal defenses
→ eg how do you think you can be defended against these charges? How can you explain your way out of these charges? What do you think your lawyer should [ ] on in order to defend you best? - Capacity to plan legal strategy
-eg what will you do if you disagree with your lawyer about how to handle your case?; should you talk with a lawyer before pleading guilty?; if your lawyer decides that you shouldn’t testify, would you go along with them?
what happens if a person is found fit?
-trial proceeds as normal, still possible to be found NCR
what is NCRMD also known as? what does it mean to be found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder?
-insanity defense: defendant not fully responsible due to mental state at time of offense
what happens if a defendant is found unfit to stand trial? why?
-competency doctrine: court proceedings can be postponed if mental state of accused prevents them from participating in their defence (given time to restore fitness)
–> accused has rights that can’t be exercised if they’re incompetent
–> unfair to try defendant if unable to participate meaningfully in proceedings
what treatment options are available for restoring fitness? what 4 criteria must it meet? how long does this usually take?
-can incl meds, therapy, other forms of intervention
-treatment order must meet following criteria:
1. Evaluators must specify anticipated time to restore fitness
2. Benefits of treatment must outweigh risks
3. Least intrusive option available should be ordered
4. Should include medication and/or training in court processes
-usu within 6 months; nearly all restored within a year
can a person be unfit forever? what happens in this case?
-if fitness isn’t restored by specified treatment period, there is a stay of proceedings: temporary halt of criminal trial process
→ accused person put under jurisdiction of provincial review board
→ review board decides: if they should remain under supervision of Review Board, or can live in community w conditions (eg in a group home)
→ prosecution must reestablish case every 2 years – burden on prosecution to prove they will eventually be put on trial; if they can’t, must issue an absolute discharge
who makes up a review board in a CST case?
-specialized tribunal of ~6 people to make decisions similar to how a court would
-has to be chaired by a judge + include 1 psychiatrist and a MH professional w experience in conditions being evaluated, or 2 psychiatrists
who inspired / what are the origins of the insanity defense? describe the standard that was used.
-Daniel M’Naghten: woodworker who believed he was target of a conspiracy involving the pope and British PM, mistakenly shot + killed PM’s secretary (1883)
-several psychiatrists testified M’Naghten was delusional
-jury agreed, declaring him not guilty by reason of insanity, held in mental hospital for life
-M’Naghten Standard: presumed sane unless the following can be proven:
a) Accused suffered from a mental disorder at time of offense, AND
b) The disorder prevented either of the following:
-understanding the nature/quality of the offence
-understanding that the offence was wrong
a survey found that respondents:
a) estimated the NCR defense is frequently used (37% of all US felony cases)
b) that it’s frequently successful (44%)
c) that NCR is a loophole to avoid punishment
how accurate are these perceptions?
a) NCR is uncommon: <1% of all US felony cases; 8/10 000 in Ca
b) NCR defense only has a 24% acquittal rate
c) NCR plea –> equal or longer time in custody
what are 3 general issues with assessing NCR(MD)?
-metal state at time of offence:
→ retrospective assessment
→ no criterion / gold standard
→ comprehensive eval of mental disorder
→ need to est they were experiencing symptoms at time of crime
→ also that the symptoms made them unable to understand what they were doing / consequences / what they did was wrong
→ need to est that mental disorder CAUSED them to be unable to understand right + wrong (if they don’t understand for another reason it doesn’t count)
→ multiple sources of data
→ attempt to corroborate: (eg in sleepwalking how do you confirm if someone had memory of doing smth?)
describe why the Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scale was developed
-developed to systematically quantify relevant psychological variables (eg seriousness of hallucinations) + situational variables (eg lvl of intoxication) at time of the offence that are salient for evaluating competence
