Transcript Forensic Psychology - Kelley Kline Phd

Forensic Psychology
Psychology & the Legal System
FSU-PC
Dr. Kelley Kline
Psychology and Law

Psychology- is the study of human behavior &
mental processes.

The Legal system—is used as a formal method by
which society uses laws to regulate human
behavior.

The concepts of psychological & behavioral
science are relevant to every area of law.
I. What is Forensic Psychology?

It is the application of psychological
findings to legal processes.

This means forensic psychologists may be
involved in the assessment, evaluation, &
treatment of criminal offenders as well as
other areas of the legal system (determining
mental fitness for trial, etc.)
A. Forensic Psychology-development

Two branches of development in this field:

1. Psychological research findings have
increasingly been used to inform various legal
processes.

2. The practice of clinical forensic psychology
has become an integral part of the overall field of
forensic science.

II. Historical Origins of Forensic
Psychology: Eyewitness testimony

Hugo Munsterberg (1908) argued on the basis of
psychological research that eyewitness testimony was
unreliable & shouldn’t be used by the legal system to bolster
convictions.

In 1974, Buckhout published the results of an experiment in
which subjects (Ss) witnessed a purse-snatching crime & were
asked to identify the perpetrator. Only 7 of 52 Ss made the
correct identification.

Buckhout concluded, after a series of similar findings, that
memory is selective, influenced by other factors, & fallible.
He argued that eyewitness identification is faulty over 90% of
time.
Why are there so many problems with
eyewitness identifications?

1. Humans are fairly unreliable in how we process
information. We are heavily influenced by our emotions
at the time of the crime (e.g., rape, assault), may focus our
attention on salient features of the crime (e.g., weapon),
unsuitable environmental conditions (e.g., darkness; rain) &
stress may impair recollection.

2. Procedures employed by law enforcement to obtain
eyewitness accounts may be flawed. Kassin et al., (2001),
cite the numerous “criminal justice procedures” that can
seriously affect an eyewitnesses accuracy. Some such
procedures used by police include: problems in the wording
of questions, line-up instructions, mug shots, induced bias,
child witness suggestibility, attitudes & expectations, etc.
DNA to the rescue!!!!!!

Despite the dearth of research clearly “debunking”
the reliability of eyewitness accounts, the legal
system clung to this as a means to improve
conviction rates.

This changed, when DNA evidence became widely
available!!!!

DNA evidence proved conclusively that many
defendants had been falsely convicted, solely on the
basis of uncorroborated eyewitness testimony.
DNA (contd.)

In 1999, Attorney General Janet Reno
familiarized herself with the literature on
the fallacy of eyewitness identification.

Reno then ordered the National Institute of
Justice to develop national guidelines for
use by law enforcement officials when
conducting interrogations & collecting
eyewitness evidence.
Current view:

Forensic Psychology plays a greater role in
the legal system than ever before.

However, it is still new to the field.
III. What does it take to be a Forensic
Psychologist?

1. The traditional approach-- Ph.D. in clinical psychology with additional
training in forensic science.

2. New approach--some universities now offer
doctoral degrees in Forensic psychology.
These programs have a broad background in basic
clinical skills & specialized training in areas of
law & criminal behavior.
IV. What do Forensic Psychologists
do?

Assessment (conduct tests to assess mental state,
IQ, competency, etc.).

Treatment (providing services to offenders in
prisons, treatment/detention centers, & following
release from prison).

Provision of testimony in a variety of legal cases
in areas such as family law (custody, visitation),
civil law (personal injury, worker’s compensation,
wills & contracts), and criminal law
(competencies, sentencing).
V. Problems distinguishing Clinical
from Forensic Psychology:

1. Clinical psychologists are trained to administer tests, make
assessments, evaluate mental state, & to determine therapeutic
outcomes. These methods aren’t the most appropriate for dealing
with potential offenders.

E.g., Clinicians aren’t overly concerned with corroborating the
defendant’s version of events, since they are often trained to believe
their clients. The defendant may be lying or malingering!!!!
2. Clinicians who are trained in a sub-specialty have to be careful
when dealing with new defendants. They may overlook important
information that may change their assessment.
E.g., the Forensic psychologist would make sure they ask for
corroborating evidence to support defendant’s story & ask for all the
details outlining the defendant’s past behaviors, criminal offenses,
family history, etc.
A. Case Study 1:

Defendant (A) --22 yr-old male arrested for
murder of 18 yr-old friend.
 Versions of events given by “A” (see below)
regarding the murder:

Version 1: “A” said his cousin (recently released
from jail) did it & that he was only acting as an
assistant since he feared for his life.

Version 2: “A” later tells police his previous
statement was false & that he did it by himself.
“A”killed his friend during a quarrel, removed his
friend’s clothing, & buried the body by the
stream.
Case Study1 contd.

Version 3: Days later “A”, changes story again &
says he was attacked by 5 youths, who killed his
friend, & left him lying there. He awoke to find
them burying the body.

Version 4: “A” then said he was with a group of
friends, & they killed the victim after he passed
out from alcohol & marijuana.
Version 5: “A” told the psychologist that he
heard voices that commanded him to choke his
friend & bury him.
 What do you think happened???

The psychologist’s view of
defendant “A”

After the fifth version of events, the expert
psychologist argued that the defendant was
psychotic & insane at the time of the murder.

Here, the expert approached the defendant as if he
was a “patient”, not a murderer trying to avoid a
conviction & sentence.

A forensic psychologist must always question the
defendant’s motives & version of events.
B. Case Study 2

Defendant (B) --38 yr-old female with 20 year
history of drug abuse, selling drugs, &
prostitution.
“B” rented a room in a boarding house occupied by
other drug addicts. There “B”, met “C”, a 42 yrold drug dealer. They became involved & “B”
started selling drugs for “C”.
“B” carried a gun & used intimidation to get other
users to pay. She pistol whipped a few of them &
hit others over the head with a pipe.
Case study 2 contd.

Crime—victims were drug users who owed “B” &
“C,” $600.00.

According to multiple witnesses, “B” urged “C” to
track down the victims, who were then abducted
by “B” & “C”, taken to the boarding house, &
then at “B’s” instigation—killed.

People in the hallway heard events. Female victim
begged “B” for her life & struggled as “B”
strangled her. “B” choked the male victim, by
shoving a newspaper down the victim’s throat,
while “C” held a gun to victim’s head.
Case study 2

“C” & “B” were arrested & “B” gave 4 different
versions of what transpired. In “B’s” versions she
implicated others, but finally conceded that she
only assisted “C” who was the primary killer.

“B” was sentenced with murder & imprisoned to
await trial.

A therapist examined “B” & argued that she was
the victim of battered woman’s syndrome. (“B”
had been going to battered woman syndrome
meetings the 3 years she was in jail).
Psychologist’s comments of “B”

“B was intimidated at the time of the murders into
helping C, which would be considered reasonable
for any person in that situation, even more so for
someone who was battered and who was passive
and compliant. One could attribute to her the
status of being a kidnapping victim or the victim of
a terrorist. She was the victim ad had to comply
in order to save her own life.”

What do you think??? Was she battered or just
manipulating the system??
VI. Forensic psychologists & psychological
testing

Forensic psychologists can administer a
number of tests to assess a defendant’s
mental state.

However, there are some criticisms with
using these tests, which are meant for
individuals in the general pop.
General criticisms of conventional tests
used in forensic practice

1. Many of these tests haven’t been
validated for forensic science.

2. Tests do not address legal issues, norms
gathered for the population may not apply
to the individual, & tests tap current
behavior when past behavior is of more
interest to forensic scientists.
Some tests are useful for insight
they give:

Projective tests Standard stimuli are presented to the
defendant (inkblots or drawings) ambiguous
enough to allow for variation in responses.

Defendant’s responses may reveal
unconscious processes, his/her true feelings,
thoughts, motives, etc.
Projective tests

Rorshach Inkblot (10 inkblots- presented
to Ss).
 --Thermatic Apperception Test (TAT)
 Projective Figure Drawings (Ss asked to
draw objects (a house, a person of opposite
sex, the worst thing that ever happened,
etc.)
Clinical Interviews

Clinicians observe the defendant’s emotional state
at time of interview.

(e.g., is person withdrawn, excitable, extremely
talkative, communicative, beligerant).

Paradigm of clinician will influence questions they
ask.
Structured Clinical Interviews

To make reliable and valid diagnoses, clinicians
need to gather standardized information on
patients.

SCID (Structured Clinical Interview)- a structured
interview for Axis I of the DSM.

Questions are in prescribed order for interview to
ask. The SCID is a branching interview, which
means the defendant’s response to one question,
will determine the next question asked.
Standard Batteries to assess
general intellectual functioning
Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleRevised (WAIS-R)
 Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
(WISC)


