The insanity defense and mental illness.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J R Rappeport.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Participating in a medical/legal situation is quite different from the ordinary office or hospital experience and requires the expert to see that all of the new parameters are clarified. A thorough and complete evaluation with a review of all the pertinent records and interviews with ancillary individuals is necessary, as is good preparation by way of a pre-trial conference with the attorney. Review of all notes and records prior to deposition or testimony can put the expert at ease. Once under oath, the expert is expected to tell the truth and not advocate for the retaining party. On the other hand, the expert must advocate for his opinion. When the answer is not known, or when one is proven wrong because new data is presented, then the expert must readily admit this. The expert should take the necessary time, pausing, listening to the question, reflecting upon the answer, giving time to the attorney to object. This trip through the vagaries of the legal system should assist psychiatrists in feeling more at ease when participating in forensic matters.
The authors examined the cohort of all defendants pleading not guilty by reason of insanity over a 12-month period in Baltimore City's superior trial court. During that time, 143 of the 11,497 defendants indicted (1.2%) pled not criminally responsible. Fourteen of those defendants (10%) were subsequently found not guilty by reason of insanity. The authors found marked agreement between the prosecution and defense with only two cases leading to full trials where the issue of insanity was argued. The evaluating physician's opinion as to criminal responsibility and Axis I diagnosis, and the most serious underlying charge discriminated between those defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity and those defendants found guilty or not guilty by the court. Other demographic factors such as age, number of dependents, educational level, severity of illness, and criminal background did not discriminate between the two groups.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.