Jurors' views on the value and objectivity of mental health experts testifying in sexually violent predator trials.
نویسندگان
چکیده
Although psychologists and psychiatrists often testify in court, we know relatively little about the extent to which jurors value the testimony they hear from these experts. We surveyed 161 jurors who rendered opinions in 14 sex offender civil commitment trials after hearing testimony from psychologists and psychiatrists serving as expert witnesses. Most jurors reported that the experts they heard testify were honest, and they tended to attribute disagreements among experts to case complexity, as opposed to adversarial allegiance or bias. Most reported that hearing from the experts helped them make better decisions and that experts using risk assessment instruments could make more accurate predictions than those who did not. Jurors were, however, more skeptical about the ability of experts to accurately predict recidivism when they heard testimony from both prosecution and defense experts. Findings suggest that jurors value risk assessment testimony from experts, but that experts must think carefully about how to best make risk assessment instrument results accessible to jurors.
منابع مشابه
DANGEROUSLY MISUNDERSTOOD Representative Jurors’ Reactions to Expert Testimony on Future Dangerousness in a Sexually Violent Predator Trial
متن کامل
Use of DSM paraphilia diagnoses in sexually violent predator commitment cases.
There is legitimate concern in the psychiatric community about the constitutionality of sexually violent predator (SVP) commitment statutes. Such constitutionality depends on the requirement that a sexual offender have a mental abnormality that makes him commit violent predatory sex offenses and reflects almost exclusively a concern for public safety, with little regard for notions of clinical ...
متن کاملDiagnosing and litigating hebephilia in sexually violent predator civil commitment proceedings.
In recent years, state and federal legislative initiatives have heavily emphasized punitive laws to combat sexual crime. These statutes include indefinite civil commitment, which is the ultimate infringement on sexual offenders' civil liberties. Many of these committed offenders have repeatedly offended against prepubescent children (pedophiles), and many have committed nonconsensual sexual off...
متن کاملDangerous Diagnoses, Risky Assumptions, and the Failed Experiment of “sexually Violent Predator” Commitment
In its 1997 opinion, Kansas v. Hendricks, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a law that reflected a new model of civil commitment. The targets of this new commitment law were dubbed “Sexually Violent Predators” (SVPs), and the Court upheld indefinite detention of these individuals on the assumption that there is a psychiatrically distinct class of individuals who, unlike typical recidivists, have a ...
متن کاملSexually violent predator evaluations: empirical evidence, strategies for professionals, and research directions.
Several states have passed civil commitment laws that allow the precautionary detention of sex offenders who have completed their criminal sentences. Over 2,500 sex offenders have been committed across states with such statutes and several thousand more sex offenders have been evaluated. Most statutes call for an evaluation of risk by a mental health professional and, although each state statut...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Behavioral sciences & the law
دوره 32 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014