What is a narrow definition of forensic psych?
- clinical practice in the legal system (assessments, treatments)
- those who are directly involved in the justice system (clinical psychologists, etc.)
What is a broad definition of forensic psych?
- research related to human behaviour and legal processes
- practice of psych within the legal system
- researchers and others indirectly involved (ex. experimental psychologists)
Roles of forensic psychologists
Clinician (clinical forensic psychologist)
responsibilities may include:
- risk assessment for release
- divorce or custody mediation
- expert testimony
- treatment programs
Roles of forensic psychologists
Forensic Psychiatry
- medical doctors who diagnose and treat mental illnesses
- requires different training
Roles of forensic psychologists
Researcher (experimental forensic psychologist)
- participates in research/studies
- deals with human behaviour and the law
- (ex.) studying effectiveness of research methods
Roles of forensic psychologists
Legal Scholar
less common
- ability to analyze mental health law + legal movements
- policy analysis
- legislative consultation
Psychology AND the Law
- seperate
- questioning and challenging aspects of the law using a psychological perspective
- study how the legal system operates
- (ex. testing accuracy of certain interrogation techniques)
Psychology IN the Law
- use of psychology within the legal system as it currently operates (ex. expert testimony)
Psychology OF the Law
- study of the law itself
- questioning the functions of law (ex. does it reduce crime rates in society?)
Hugo Munsterberg
“father of forensic psychology”
- wrote “On The Witness Stand” which was controversial and helped get psychologists into the legal field
William Marston
research on lie detection
Important cases
State v. Driver (1921)
attempted rape of a young girl
- first use of expert testimony
- court accepted expert evidence from a psychologist
Important cases
Brown v. Board of Education(1954)
detrimental effects of segregation in schools
- psychologists vs. segregation
- research from the “doll test” used as evidence in court
Important cases
Jenkins v. United States (1962)
breaking + entering w/intent to rape
- psychologists argued the defendant was not guilty due to insanity
- judge said they weren’t qualified to give expert testimony regarding mental illness
Trial Consultant
- hired by lawyer or legal client
- helps prepare and carry out a trial
- ethical responsibilities ex. help improve witness credibility if/when client is lying
- helps behind the scenes instead of taking stand
Expert Witness
- helps in understanding a topic - educator of the judge/jury, not for defendant
- asked to testify, provide research
- provide an evidence based opinion
- doesn’t have to witness the crime
Challenges of expert testimony
what is a main conflict between psychology and law when providing evidence?
Psych: Empiricism
evidence based, data must be collected, knowledge of scientific experience, must be measurable, reliable, replicable
Law: Intuition
can rely on own experiences and “gut feelings”, comparing to other cases that may be similar
Admissibility of Expert Testimony
General Acceptance Test
- Vague
- Standard for accepting expert testimony
Admissibility of Expert Testimony
US: Daubert Criteria
(4 points)
To determine admissibility of expert testimony in court it must be:
1) Peer reviewed
2) Testable
3) Recognized rate of error
4) Meet professional standards
Admissibility of Expert Testimony
Canada: Mohan Criteria
(5 points)
Evidence must be:
1) **Reliable **
2) **Relevant **
Point makes an issue in the case more or less likely (data collected has to actually make sense for the context and be helpful)
3) Necessary for assisting the trier of fact
Has to expand knowledge, can’t be something the court could have concluded on their own (ex. Common sense)
4) Not violating rules of exclusion
5) Provided by expert
according to the GAT, in order for scientific evidence to be admitted to court it must be:
1) Peer reviewed
2) Testable
