Ogloff and Finkelman (1999) once stated that the science of psychology exists in a state of tension with the legal system in numerous ways. This disparity between the two fields has existed for some time now, and to this day, the two disciplines still clash. But there have been instances where this conflict led to beneficial outcomes. To discover the reason behind law and psychology’s different approaches, revisiting the fundamental aspects of each field is required.
Initial Discussion: The Core Differences of Two Disciplines
The most evident difference between law and psychology is each discipline’s approach to a case. Psychology, being the scientific study of the mind, follows the scientific method in all proceedings of a case. Starting with
…show more content…
A forensic psychologist applies psychology into the criminal justice system, while a forensic scientist gathers evidence and creates expert opinions based on their hypotheses.
On the other hand, Weinstein and Dewsbury (2007) invoke the belief that the law favors answers that are beyond a reasonable doubt. The law, therefore, is less objective (because the case is subject to a judge’s expert opinion), yet requires closer attention to detail and critical thinking. Those who practice these disciplines also have a conflict of interest. Zealous representation is expected of lawyers, so they are strong advocates for their client no matter how grievous the offense committed.
Meanwhile, forensic psychologists adhere to rules 101 and 102 of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (1991) which states, “accuracy, honesty and truthfulness in the science, teaching and practice of forensic psychology”.
Recurring Problems with Forensic Psychologists as Expert
…show more content…
The proceedings revolved around John W. Hinckley Jr. and his attempted assassination of then-President Ronald Reagan on March 30th, 1981. The gunman’s actions wounded four people, including the president himself.
Despite his condition, Hinckley appeared to be in capable condition during his trial. This caused the jury to be skeptical about his mental illness claims, until the help of 5 witnesses ensured his acquittal. According to the testimony of his team (two of which were psychologists), Hinckley suffered from remissive major depression, psychotic disorder, and active narcissistic personality disorder.
The subsequent presentation of a CAT scan of the defendant’s brain and reports from his psychologists proved his claims, and the district court acquitted the gunman. The outcome of this case was met with much criticism, with 83 percent of people saying that “justice was not served”.
In the context of law and psychology, however, the case presents an interesting thought. Hinckley was mentally ill, yet he handled himself like any average man would. This case showed that determining the innermost thoughts of another individual is a near impossible task, and that is a potential problem from both a legal and psychological
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. (2012). Forensic and legal psychology: Psychological science applied to law. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Ewing, C., & McCann, J. (2006). Minds on trial: Great cases in law and psychology. NY: Oxford University. pp. 129-139. Retrieved from http://undergrad.floridatechonline.com/Courses/PSY3100/Critical_Reading_Ewing_McCann.pdf
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. (2012). Forensic and Legal Psychology: Psychological Science Applied to Law. New York: Worth Publishers.
Jurors opinions can be influenced by an emotional testimony. Deborah W. Denno’s article Neuroscience, Cognitive Psychology, and the Criminal Justice System is the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law’s publication of a panel at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools. The panel had three goals: “examine the interrelationship between neuroscience and substantive criminal law; to incorporate criminal procedure more directly into the examination in a way that past investigations have not done; and to scrutinize cognitive bias in decision-making,” (Denno
Forensic Psychology is a specialized practice by psychologists in areas of clinical psychology, counseling psychology, school psychology, and neuropsychology. You will be engaged regularly as an expert and primarily proposed to offer professional psychological expertise to the judicial system.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
Former U.S president Ronald Reagan was shot by a man named John Hinckley in the year 1981. The president along with many of his entourage survived the shooting despite the heavy infliction of internal and external injuries. The Hinckley case is a classic example of the 'not guilty by reason of insanity' case (NGRI). The criminal justice system under which all men and women are tried holds a concept called mens rea, a Latin phrase that means "state of mind". According to this concept, Hinckley committed his crime oblivious of the wrongfulness of his action. A mentally challenged person, including one with mental retardation, who cannot distinguish between right and wrong is protected and exempted by the court of law from being unfairly punished for his/her crime. (1)
Forensic evidence can provide just outcomes in criminal matters. However, it is not yet an exact science as it can be flawed. It can be misrepresented through the reliability of the evidence, through nonstandard guidelines, and through public perception. Forensic science can be dangerously faulty without focus on the ‘science’ aspect. It can at times be just matching patterns based on an individual’s interpretations. This can lead to a miscarriage of justice and forever alter a person’s life due to a perceived “grey area” (Merritt C, 2010) resulting in a loss of confidence in the reliability of forensic evidence.
The birth of psychology was in December of 1879, at Germanys University of Leipzig (Myers, 2014, p.2). In 1960, Wilhelm Wundt and Edward Titchener defines psychology as “the science of mental health” (Myers, 2014, p.4). However, two provocative American psychologists, John Watson and B.F Skinner, redefined psychology in 1920. They redefined psychology as “the scientific study of observable behavior” (Myers, 2014, p.4). The problem arose when psychologists realized people could not observe feeling or thought so they needed to come up with a new definition for psychology. We define psychology today as “the science of behavior and mental processes” (Myers, 2014, p.4). Psychology includes many subfields such as human development, social behavior,
Costanzo, Mark, and Daniel Krauss. Forensic and legal psychology: psychological science applied to law. New York, NY: Worth Publishers, 2012. Print.
In the criminal justice system psychologist play several roles, but in the jury selection process they serve as a consultant. This essay will provide three instances of psychological concepts and illustrate how they are applied to the determination of juries. The essay will also address a common ethical obligation confronting psychologist in the areas of corrections, law enforcement, court systems, and academia.
Greene, E., Heilbrun, K., Fortune, W. H., & Nietzel, M. T. (2006). Psychology and the legal system (6th ed.). Florence, KY: Cengage Learning.
Forensic Psychology, which is occasionally referred to as Legal Psychology, originally made its debut in the late 1800’s. A Harvard Professor, Professor Munsterberg, introduced the idea of psychology and law with his book, On the Witness Stand in 1908. Since the inception of the idea of psychology and law there have been proponents, as well as though that have spoken against the theories proposed by Munsterberg’s, along with other scientists, theorists, and psychologists that believed that Forensic Psychology had no standing to be linked to topics of law. This literature review will attempt to identify scholarly articles that trace the origins and the movement that led to Forensics Psychology becoming a specialty within the field of psychology. I will also attempt to explain What is Forensic Psychology as well as the part it plays within the legal system.
John Hinckley’s trial ended in 1982 with the verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. About a year before, Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan because he was infatuated with the famous actress Jodie Foster. He thought shooting Reagan would impress her and lead her to fall in love with him. After the verdict was announced, the public responded with dismay because they felt as though Hinckley should pay for what he had done. Following the uproar, the United States revised and limited the insanity plea with the hopes that fewer people would use it or actually receive the verdict (Hans). While on trial for any type of crime, the defendant always has the opportunity to plea not guilty by reason of insanity. However, after entering that plea, he or she has to go through extensive testing to determine whether or not insanity is truly present. Throughout this country, varying views concerning the insanity plea exist. Some believe the insanity plea should be restored to what it had been previously while some believe it works just fine now, and others think it should be abolished all together.
Criminal psychologists are well-trained in the principles of human behavior, criminal psychologists will work very diligently with courts, attorneys, law enforcement agencies, and multiple other stakeholders that include civil and criminal cases. It is a particularly new field of work. They have also been serving as workers who are advisors to the courts for decades. They may also be consultants for defendants or victims of crime. During the trial sequence as an expert witness, they may also rehabilitate offenders that are already convicted of a crime. The field of expertise of a criminal psychologist is in forensics, applying psychological principles to the criminal justice system. A great deal of their occupied time is for carrying out evaluations of accused and alleged victims. A criminal psychologist could examine a defendant to determine their ability to stand trial. A criminal psychologist could also interview victims of crime to determine a timeline of events. Supplanting expert testimony is yet another primary field of work for criminal psychologists, as they work in civil, family, criminal, and military