M3_A1

Module 3 Overview

In this module, you will learn about criminals from two points of view—their own and that of a professional evaluator. The former helps investigators in their pursuit of perpetrators of crime. The latter assists the triers of fact (judges and juries) during sentencing proceedings and the clinicians with treatment planning and various interventions. How do offenders understand and report what they do? It is very common for incarcerated offenders to refer to their crime as "catching a case" as if they are talking about becoming ill with the flu.

Offenders sometimes refer to their parole or supervised release violation as "they violated me again," as if the offenders themselves are not responsible for their own behavior. In your course textbook readings for this module, Canter and Youngs (2009) introduced four major themes of criminality—the victim, the hero, the professional, and the revenger. Before proceeding with the readings, consider these roles and think how they can be described. Then read the chapters and see how close your hypotheses correspond with the descriptions of the different roles.

Criminal investigators and forensic or clinical evaluators have different priorities. The investigators interview and interrogate suspects in order to make an arrest. The clinicians evaluate offenders before and after conviction either to assist the court or to plan potential treatment. If one can understand the inner workings of the suspect's personality, his or her fears, hopes, motivations, and goals, it may be possible to obtain a quicker confession. For a clinician, the same understanding may help in planning both general and specific treatments and interventions for the convicted offender that not only will prevent recidivism but may also lead to this offender becoming a contributing member of society. The first step in this understanding is the establishment of rapport between the investigator (evaluator) and the person in question.

The clinician at this point does not challenge the individual's beliefs, personal convictions, or the claim that he or she is "the real victim here." On the contrary, the criminal should be convinced that he or she has a captive audience in the person of the evaluator. This will allow the criminal to feel comfortable in talking about himself or herself. Open-ended questions, rather than ones that can be answered with a yes or a no, can further increase the individual's level of comfort.

In this module, you will learn how data is analyzed, interpreted, and presented by looking closely at the continuing violence or nonviolence of death row inmates and by following an investigation of a serial murderer. Typically, juries sentencing defendants to be executed believe that they are extremely violent or indiscriminately homicidal. Well-planned research has shown otherwise. Detectives, investigating what they believe to be the work of a serial killer, must closely examine the data for similarities and differences to determine if they are dealing with one or more perpetrators. In the investigation of a crime, the detectives must constantly make choices regarding their focus of attention and the leads that need to be followed first.

How do we know what aspects of any particular crime are important? For example, what is more salient, the fact that the burglar knew how to disable an alarm or that he or she carelessly left his or her fingerprints at the scene of the crime, his or her watching television while helping himself or herself to the food in the victim's refrigerator or his or her punching the victim who suddenly returns to the house instead of simply running away? A lot of training goes into the making of a good detective. An investigator constantly compares the data in front of him or her with previous solved and unsolved crimes, makes assumptions, and tests various hypotheses.

Ultimately, the evidence against the defendant must be presented to the jury. The evidence must be strong enough to convince the jury that the defendant in front of them is the perpetrator of the crime. With the developing science of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis and other sophisticated crime scene investigation techniques, juries are being repeatedly asked to examine and opine about very complex concepts. Thus, it behooves the expert witness or anyone else presenting technical data in court to do so at the level of both sophistication and simplicity that is clearly understood and not misinterpreted. Lack of accuracy or misinterpretation of data may lead to an innocent man's life sentence or even execution. It may also lead to a guilty man's release from custody.

You will examine the research findings on death row inmates for the first assignment in this module. For the RA, you will analyze a case and prepare a postarrest mental health assessment and investigative assessment. You will develop a detailed postconviction treatment plan for the offender. In the third, nongraded assignment, you will explain the different criminal narrative themes as provided in your readings.

M3_A1 1

Compare the difference between how law enforcement personnel and forensic mental health professionals would conduct assessment and criminal investigative procedures.
Describe appropriate psychological tests that can be useful in psychological profiling and/or criminal investigation.
Identify specific personality characteristics that have been found to be linked with specific criminal behavior patterns, while discerning less salient personality characteristics that do not reliably inform psychological profiling.
Explain how an offender's cognitive functioning, diagnosis, and environmental factors might contribute to the offender's criminal offense behaviors.

Arson

The local police detectives are investigating a suspicious fire at a local warehouse.

Review the scenario that follows and answer the related questions.

Scenario

The investigating detectives believe that the fire was started by arson. Over the next few days, several other fires happen around the city, and the police attempt to determine whether these fires are related in any way.

The detectives gather all the evidence and compare the details of each event. They interview all witnesses. Owners of the properties that were on fire are interviewed in great detail, and their backgrounds are investigated. This includes looking into their current and past financial situations and whether they would benefit financially by collecting insurance.

Q1: Which tasks in the scenario would be performed by members of the law enforcement?

Members of the law enforcement would collect all relevant information about the crime in question.

Q2: Which tasks in the scenario would be performed by a forensic psychologist?

A forensic psychologist may be hired to conduct a competency evaluation of the defendant. In such cases, if there is no financial incentive, defense attorneys usually pay close attention to psychological factors with the intent of using a mental health defense.

Ethical Dilemmas; Standing Trial

A forensic psychologist is conducting an evaluation for competency to stand trial (CST). This competency is made up of two factors: the ability to understand the judicial process and the ability to assist one’s attorney in a defense.

In this scenario, the defendant is accused of murdering his wife.

Review the scenario that follows and answer the related questions.

Scenario:

The evaluator must determine if the defendant is mentally ill or cognitively impaired, and whether the impairments (if they exist) compromise his ability to proceed with the legal case.

During the evaluation, the defendant states, “I killed her, doc, I killed her nice and good and she is not coming back.” He then proceeds to provide details of the murder.

The forensic psychologist includes this information in his report.

Q1: Is the forensic psychologist right in including the defendant’s statements about killing his wife in the report? Why or why not?

Prior to any evaluation, the person being evaluated is informed of its nature and purpose. Limits of confidentiality are addressed in great detail. Whether the expert is hired by the defense attorney, the prosecutor, or the court, his ethical duties are the same. He is supposed to address only the psycholegal issues he was asked to evaluate. Competency to stand trial has nothing to do with criminal responsibility.

Thus, an expert may not include any incriminating information in the report if he was not specifically asked to do so. Doing so is unethical, and his report and testimony will not be allowed in court.

Conclusion

Much of the focus of this module has been on exploring two different perspectives on criminals—that of the convicted criminal himself or herself and that of a professional evaluator whose job is to offer his or her clinical opinion on this perpetrator to aid the criminal justice system in various determinations (sentencing, parole, probation, criminal responsibility, etc.). As you have learned, this perspective-taking exercise produces vastly different views not only of the ultimate criminal responsibility but also on who is the ultimate victim in a particular case. Often, a criminal will attempt to "sell" his or her perspective that the "system" has wronged him or her and that he or she is the true victim of this system or his or her circumstances. Professional evaluators cannot be swayed by these stories as they must objectively analyze the data to come up with an unbiased professional opinion to aid the courts and other criminal justice professionals.

Click the link below to watch the video titled "Lessons from Death Row Inmates."

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_r_dow_lessons_from_death_row_inmates