The intervention of experts in the legal arena is not one that is foreign; in fact, the history of experts as advisors could be traced back to Middle Ages where their expertise was required in highly-technical cases where the judge and jury were not equipped with the essential knowledge. However, their roles have significantly transformed when the “adversarial revolution” took place in the nineteenth century, and in place of an advisor was the role of the partisan witness. The central theme of this essay revolves around the incompatibility between advocacy and science, as propounded by Smith. In this essay, the issues and objections surrounding the role of expert witnesses, focusing particularly on the psychiatric and toxicological expertise, …show more content…
They argue that elusive insanity does not manifest itself through conventional and recognizable signs, and it is hence undetectable by the untrained eye, propelling a need for expert witnesses. This strategy was evident as the Esquirol circle proposed the concept of “monomania” in the courtrooms in 1820s. The Esquirol circle took the assessments of insanity beyond of the sphere of common sense and construed them niche expertise, necessitating the need for their intervention. This technique was useful as they presented monomania as a form of elusive insanity. As Goldstein remarked, the success of this strategy is manifested in the fact that advocates “accepted it prematurely” and was hence free from significant scientific debate for decades. Later in the nineteenth-century, the concept of “hereditary degeneracy” was invoked, standing in lieu of monomania. Goldstein regarded this as a “tactical” move by psychiatrists to make themselves relevant “before the criminal justice system and the …show more content…
Essentially, under this technique, experts present their scientific theories through the means of model and demonstration. This technique, designed to “lend transparency to science” , was instead abused by opportunistic experts as exemplified in the Buchanan trial. The defense attorney, in this case, used a human brain and trickery to impeach the credibility of the opposing expert witness before the jury. The former hinged on the latter’s failure to identify a real brain from a model at his advantage. Laypersons, albeit lacking the capacity to comprehend complex composition of the testimony, could grasp an expert who failed to distinguish a real brain from a model. As Essig explained, if the credibility of a witness could be undermined on a straightforward point, his credibility will no doubt be impeached when complex issues are disputed. In addition, in the same trial, Essig noted that the pharmacist managed to paint a picture in the jury’s mind through a simple demonstration of a solubility test. Manifestly, this technique is effective as it spawns a significant “rhetorical impact”. Evidently, courtroom scientific demonstrations were designed for experts to convey perplexing scientific theories to the jury, allowing laypersons to “see for themselves” the truth of specific scientific assertions. However, in reality, it allows experts to use the courtroom as a stage for their perfectly
Are psychopaths like Alice, “mad or bad?” (page 21). The question whether psychopaths are mentally ill or just a bad seed has caused much debate. Dr. Hare explains that the problem is not only labeling them mad or bad, but who deals with them. “Does the treatment or control of the psychopath rightly fall to mental health professionals or to the correctional system?” (page 21). Not only are professionals confused on how to classify psychopaths, but the media also creates confusion. Psychopath means mental illness and the media uses the word to classify someone as, “insane or crazy”, (page 22). Dr. Hare explains that even though psychopaths, “cannot be understood in terms of traditional views of mental illness”, they, “are not disoriented or out of touch with reality, nor do they experience the delusions, hallucinations, or intense subjective distress that characterize most other mental disorders…psychopaths are rational and aware of what they are doing and why.” (page 22). Most professionals use the term psychopath and sociopath as one in the same. Since DSM-III, antisocial personality disorder has been used in place of psychopath and sociopath. Philippe Pinel was the first psychiatrist describe a psychopath and Harvey Cleckley was one of the first successful publish a book describing a psychopath to the general public . Pinel used the term, “insanity without delirium”, (page 25). Cleckley wrote The Mask of Sanity, which influenced researchers in North America. Dr. Robert Hare explained that WWII was the first time clinicians felt a need to diagnosis people with psychopathy. Due to the draft, there was a need to weed out the people could disrupt or harm the military structure. Dr. Robert Hare realized how hard it was to identify a true psychopaths from rule breakers and developed the Psychopathy Checklist. This checklist is used world wide to help clinicians identify true
The courtroom is not used for finding out the truth. It is used for power and gaining riches. Jerome Facher, a defendant in the Woburn case for Grace, was good wi...
1. What was the main thesis of the article and what does the article tell us about deviance? According to Rosenhan, what were the reasons why the pseudo-patients were never detected as sane?
Therefore, a defendant, the court or the attorney general can order a hearing on motion. Before the date of the hearing of the case, the court may order a psychological or psychiatric evaluation of the defendant. Pursuant to the provisions of section 4247, psychologists or psychiatrists report the findings to the court. The court has the permission to request a deadline for the evaluation so that it can insure the promptness of the examination. The court can also request the experts who carried out the evaluation, to specify observations made of the defendant, the type of examination carried out and the opinion of the experts on the competency
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
Szasz, Thomas. Coercion as Cure: A Critical History of Psychiatry. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction, 2007. Print. Braslow, Joel T. Mental Ills and Bodily Cures: Psychiatric Treatment in the First Half of the Twentieth Century. California: University of California, 1997. Print.
I have recently examined my latest patient, on OCtober 23 at 10:45 A.M. The patient has been accused with the murder of the old man. The patient admits to what he has done but his beliefs make him think that he is completely sane and not mad. “The disease had sharpened my senses-not destroyed-not dulled them”(Poe 203).
Through the use of insanity as a metaphor, William Shakespeare, Edgar Allen Poe, William Blake, and Charlotte Perkins Gilman, introduced us to characters and stories that illustrate the path to insanity from the creation of a weakened psychological state that renders the victim susceptible to bouts of madness, the internalization of stimuli that has permeated the human psyche resulting in the chasm between rational and irrational thought, and the consequences of the effects of the psychological stress of external stimuli demonstrated through the actions of their characters.
To begin, it is important there be an established definition of insanity. Though the original work is set in the turn of the 17th century, and Branagh's in the late 19th, it is important that insanity be described based on current definitions. Antiquated understandings of the matter will provide very little as far as frames of argument. Thus, for this task, the paper will employ law.com's vast legal dictionary for a current definition of insanity. The dictionary tasks itself to such extent. It defines insanity as “mental illness of such a sever...
In Anatomy of a Murder, there were four expert witnesses, Dr. Smith, Dr. Harcourt, Dr. Raschid, and Dr. Dompierre, who testified during the trial and gave their respected opinions based on their expertise about the evidence and stipulations raised. An expert witness is defined as a witness who has special knowledge or training in a specialized area (Gardner & Anderson, 2013, pg.123). The opinion of an expert witness may be admissible if the opinion is being given about a subject that can clear issues in the court. To determine whether or not the expert witness testimony is admissible, it must meet the requirements of the Federal Rules of Evidence 702-704. In addition to reviewing each of the three Federal Rules of Evidence, I reviewed each of the four expert witness testimonies and analyzed whether or not each testimony complied each Federal Rule of evidence.
Much of my skepticism over the insanity defense is how this act of crime has been shifted from a medical condition to coming under legal governance. The word "insane" is now a legal term. A nuerological illness described by doctors and psychiatrists to a jury may explain a person's reason and behavior. It however seldom excuses it. The most widely known rule in...
The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes
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.
Some people say that by watching the court system in action, what once was very unknown and unfamiliar, has now become familiar and useful in helping people become more knowledgeable of what happens inside courtrooms. Most people have not been in a courtrooms and only have the perspective that T.V. gives to them. Now they are able to see what really goes on and now can better understand and relate.
In conclusion, the courtroom is a very good place to learn and understand the practical side of the law than the theoretical part. This is because a person gets first hand information, and the counsels and the crown prosecutor brings out various facts that are supported by statutes and precedents. Additionally, one gets to see how justice is administered and whether what people say about the justice system is true or false. Therefore, by visiting the courtroom, I have to understand that the administration of justice is fair.