司法精神病学鉴定为无精神病刑事案例的智力分析

目的研究司法精神病学鉴定中被鉴定为无精神病刑事案件者的智力水平。方法对88例被鉴定为无精神病的刑事案例及89例被鉴定为精神分裂症的刑事案例的智力测验结果进行对比分析。结果无精神病组与精神分裂症组的性别、年龄、文化、职业、婚姻及案件类型的构成差异无统计学意义;无精神病组的智力测验成绩显著优于精神分裂症组但低于正常水平(常模);自称有精神病或否认有精神病案例间智商的差异无统计学意义。结论无精神病案例的智力测验结果反映这类被鉴定人的智力有轻微受损。     

110例精神病重复鉴定结论分歧原因分析

对１１０例重复鉴定结论分歧案例资料进行回顾性分析，表明随着鉴定次数的增加，鉴定结论的一致性增加；导致鉴定诊断失误的原因中，调查不全、检查不细占４６．９％，分析过程中主观片面占３９．８％，概念不清、认症不准占１３．３％，诊断正确而责任能力评定失误的占７６．９％。导致鉴定失误的主要原因包括：工作方法、思维方法不当，专业知识不足     

鉴定结论在运用中的几个问题

鉴定结论在刑事司法实践中运用较为广泛。但也存在一些值得探讨的问题：交通事故责任认定书是行政责任认定结论而不是鉴定结论：同一事项存在多个不同鉴定结论时。不能简单地以鉴定机构的级别来取舍．而应结合其他证据来综合判断：运用鉴定结论前应当审查其合去性：鉴定结论在刑事司法实践中有其发挥着重要作用。     

影响痕迹鉴定结论在司法实践中价值实现的因素

痕迹鉴定是司法鉴定的一个有机组成部分,痕迹鉴定结论尤其是手纹鉴定结论一直以来被认为具有极大的权威性,因而在法庭上被广泛的采纳,并被我国三大诉讼法明确规定为七大证据之一,具有很大的价值。但随着社会的发展,随着人们对事物更深层次的认识,那种鉴定结论具有至高无上的权威性的观点遭到了来自多方面的质疑,本文就影响痕迹鉴定结论在司法实践中价值实现的因素浅析如下。     

酒精性精神障碍刑事责任能力的评定——附16例分析

作者对16例酒精性精神障碍鉴定案例进行分析.鉴定结论,诊断为普通醉洒13例,慢性酒精中毒3例.16例中,评定无责任能力2例(12.5%),限制责任能力2例(12.5%),完全责任能力12例(75.0%).作者强调应根据被鉴定人的既往饮酒史,醉酒后的表现,精神检查,神经系统检查,作案动机,作案前有无预谋,案发后有无掩饰行为,以及各种检查结果等,综合判断被鉴定人对其危害行为是否丧失辨认和控制能力.     

鉴定结论司法运用中几个问题的探讨

鉴定结论在刑事司法实践中运用较为广泛，但也存在一些值得探讨的问题：交通事故责任认定书是行政责任认定结论而不是鉴定结论；同一事项存在多个不同鉴定结论时，不能简单地以鉴定机构的级别来取舍，而应结合其它证据来综合判断；运用鉴定结论前应当审查其合法性等。鉴定结论在刑事司法实践中主要通过以下方面发挥重要作用：起到联结其它证据的作用、与其它证据相互印证，认定案件事实、直接证明案件事实。     

法医精神病学鉴定的思维方式

<正> 在司法精神鉴定中,对被鉴定人精神疾病或违法行为病态性认识的出发点或方式不同,将导致不同的鉴定结论或出现鉴定结论偏离。本文作者从对精神疾病的认定、对被鉴定人法律行为的认定和对鉴定结论的认识等思维方式进行探讨。     

浅谈鉴定结论在司法实践中的审查运用

鉴定结论作为法定证据之一,具有其他证据所没有的独特的科学性,对某些案件的最终定性起着决定作用,被广泛地运用于刑事司法实践之中,鉴定结论并非都是科学、合理、客观、准确、有效的,对鉴定结论进行审查是非常必要的。     

涉外司法精神病学重复鉴定1例

1案例被鉴定人史密斯(化名,男,41岁,美国国籍),于2003年4月6日20时许在暂住地与其妻子李某(女,25岁,中国国籍)发生争执,后持刀杀死李某。案发后史密斯洗澡更衣,乘出租车到美国大使馆,后被公安人员抓获。此案在审理过程中,曾对史密斯先后进行了两次司法精神病鉴定,鉴定结论不一致。为慎重起见,法院委托某法庭科学技术鉴定研究所,要求组织全国专家对被鉴定人进行重新鉴定。     

论司法精神医学鉴定结论的审查

司法精神医学鉴定是指在诉讼过程中 ,鉴定人受司法机关委托 ,对案件中涉及司法精神医学问题的内容进行鉴定 ,出具鉴定结论的过程。鉴定结论作为鉴定结果及证据材料的形式之一 ,必须经过法庭审查才能被采信 ,发挥证据效力。本文拟通过对司法精神医学鉴定的特点 ,司法精神医学鉴定结论审查的必要性、审查的方法和形式的分析 ,对司法精神医学鉴定结论的审查制度展开论述 ,以期抛砖引玉 ,完善我国证据制度。一、司法精神医学鉴定的特点司法精神医学鉴定的过程 ,是鉴定人接受司法机关委托后 ,在约定的时限内 ,根据收集的有关资料 ,结合对被鉴定人…     

A comparison of criminal sexual conduct defendants based on victim age

This study compared defendants charged with Criminal Sexual Conduct whose victims were <6 years of age with defendants whose victims were 12 or more years of age. The study included 163 men referred to the evaluation unit of a state center for forensic psychiatry. Thirty-eight men had younger victims (YVs) and 125 men had older victims (OVs). The variables of comparison were defendant demographic and psychiatric variables frequently identified in the sex offender literature. Controlling for other demographic and psychiatric variables by use of logistic regression modeling, elderly defendants (60 years or greater), and incest offenders were three times more likely to have YVs (Odds Ratio [OR] 3.08 and 3.11, respectively). Unlike previous studies defendants with serious psychiatric pathology (psychosis or mania) were no more likely to have YVs (OR 0.66) than were defendants without psychosis.     

Psychiatric evaluations of sexual offenders

Ninety-five defendants charged with sexual offenses were evaluated in a forensic psychiatry clinic. Their psychiatric diagnoses, as well as social, demographic, and criminal characteristics, were studied. Almost half were found to have personality disorders, while one-fifth were given a diagnosis of schizophrenia, affective disorder, or an atypical psychosis. Surprisingly few were diagnosed as having a paraphilia.     

Quality of criminal responsibility reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary

This paper is the third in a series of research reports on quality of forensic mental health evaluations submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. Previous studies examined quality of reports assessing competency to stand trial (CST) and post-acquittal conditional release, in felony defendants undergoing court-ordered examinations. Utilizing a 44-item quality coding instrument, this study examined quality of criminal responsibility reports in a sample of 150 forensic mental health evaluations conducted between 2006 and 2010 by court-appointed panels. Raters attained high levels of agreement in training and quality coding. Similar to the previous studies, overall quality of reports was mediocre, falling below the .80 quality criterion score for report elements, regardless of evaluator professional identification or employment status. Level of agreement between evaluators and judicial sanity determinations was “fair” using Cicchetti's (1994) standards for interpretation of intra-class correlations. Level of agreement was lower than previously published findings for CST reports and better than conditional release reports. Reasons for mediocre report quality and “fair” inter-rater agreement are discussed, including the fact that criminal responsibility evaluations are complex, retrospective in nature, and involve significant degrees of inference. In contrast to CST evaluations, assessment of criminal responsibility involves a mental state at the time of the offense evaluation. Threats to reliability in forensic reports are discussed. Suggestions for improvement of report quality are proffered, including standardization of procedures and report format and use of forensic assessment instruments.     

头部外伤后精神损伤的法医学鉴定(附204例分析)

目的　研究颅脑外伤所致精神障碍的损伤程度评定标准。方法　通过对２０４ 例由司法部门委托进行法医学精神损伤程度鉴定实践,重点对颅脑外伤所致神经症的损伤程度评定标准及其他相关问题进行了讨论。结果　２０４ 例中,男、女比例无差异。年龄组以２１ ～３０ 岁（６３ 例） 、３１～４０ 岁（５３ 例） 居多。表明上述年龄组的社会活动多,受到伤害的可能性大;职业以工人、农民为多,文化程度相对较低。损伤原因以伤害（１０７ 例） 、交通事故（４９ 例） 为多。损伤与精神障碍间隔时间,半年以内１５２ 例,半年至１ 年为２３ 例,表明鉴定时间选择在１ 年内为佳。精神障碍的种类与性质：器质性精神障碍１０８ 例,占５２－８％ ;功能性精神障碍８４ 例,占４１－４％ ,其中外伤后神经症（ 含癔症３５ 例）６６ 例,占３２－３ ％ 。社会功能评定：无社会功能受损７７ 例,轻度受损４１ 例,明显受损８６ 例。神经系统检查：２０４ 例中有一过性神经体征３８ 例,有明显阳性体征６２ 例。损伤与精神障碍的关系：直接因果关系１０４ 例、间接因果关系６１ 例;条件相关３４ 例、无相关５ 例。损伤程度评定结果：重伤８５ 例,轻伤６７ 例,伤病关系评定４７ 例。结论　通过对２０４ 例头部外伤     

Forensic Mental Health Clinical Evaluation: An Analysis of Interstate and Intersystemic Differences

Forensic mental health evaluation systems have undergone major changes during the past two decades, and the variability of service delivery systems across states is significant. We compared assessments of competence to stand trial and criminal responsibility in three states with different systems for forensic mental health evaluations: Michigan, Ohio, and Virginia. Although all three states use comparable legal criteria to judge competence and criminal responsibility, we found large, statistically significant differences among the states in the proportion of defendants referred for evaluation who were assessed as incompetent or not criminally responsible. In addition, significant differences were found in the diagnostic and offense categories of defendants referred for evaluation. Our findings suggest that the structure of a system for providing forensic evaluation services may significantly affect both the group of individuals referred for evaluation as well as evaluation outcome.     

Diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder and criminal responsibility

The present study empirically investigates whether personality disorders and psychopathic traits in criminal suspects are reasons for diminished criminal responsibility or enforced treatment in high security hospitals. Recently, the tenability of the claim that individuals with personality disorders and psychopathy can be held fully responsible for crimes has been questioned on theoretical bases. According to some interpretations, these disorders are due to cognitive, biological and developmental deficits that diminish the individual's accountability.The current article presents two studies among suspects of serious crimes under forensic evaluation in a Dutch forensic psychiatric observation clinic. The first study examined how experts weigh personality disorders in their conclusions as far as the degree of criminal responsibility and the need for enforced forensic psychiatric treatment are concerned (n = 843). The second study investigated associations between PCL-R scores and experts' responsibility and treatment advisements (n = 108).The results suggest that in Dutch forensic practice, the presence of a personality disorder decreased responsibility and led to an advice for enforced forensic treatment. Experts also take characteristics of psychopathy concerning impulsivity and (ir)responsibility into consideration when judging criminal accountability. Furthermore, they deem affective deficiencies sufficiently important to indicate suspects' threat to society or dangerousness and warrant a need for forensic treatment.     

司法精神病鉴定基本问题研究

近年来我国刑事司法实践中曝光的若干典型个案凸显精神病鉴定的混乱状况。实证调研发现,精神病鉴定自身的特征——对象的复杂性、过程的回溯性、知识背景的跨学科性、手段的有限性与结论的主观性,影响到其客观性与可信度。目前精神病鉴定存在的问题主要包括启动难、鉴定过程中医学与法学学科错位、诉讼权利保障机制欠缺、强制医疗制度带有行政化特征以及鉴定体制改革引发的问题。应当在坚持职权主义启动模式的基础上,对部分死刑案件增设强制启动机制,增设申请启动鉴定的上诉途径,细化启动考量标准;司法精神病专家与法律职业群体之间应当重新分工;应当增设被鉴定人由于鉴定导致人身自由被剥夺的法定强制措施以及在专家辅助人的帮助下对鉴定意见的质证权;强制医疗程序应当进行司法化改造并通过社会化途径加强执行能力;在鉴定管理体制上,应当取消现有鉴定主体限于医院的规定,恢复等级化的体系设置并建立鉴定人准入与培养机制。     

The presence of low IQ and mental retardation among murder defendants referred for pretrial evaluation

After an overview of definitions of mental retardation and recent case law regarding mental retardation and the death penalty, this paper presents a study of factors associated with a mental retardation (MR) diagnosis among murder defendants. Subjects with a full-scale IQ< or =70 (n=42) were compared with other pretrial murder defendants (n=228) referred for forensic evaluation over a 5-year period. Subjects with an IQ< or =70 who were diagnosed with MR were compared with subjects with an IQ< or =70 who did not receive this diagnosis. Female murder defendants were more likely to receive a diagnosis of MR (p=0.03). MR was also more commonly diagnosed in subjects with an Axis I cognitive disorder (p=0.018). Having an IQ< or =70 was more common in subjects with a psychotic and substance use disorder (p=0.03) and did not necessarily lead to a diagnosis of MR in this subgroup. Implications for diagnosing MR among murder defendants are discussed.     

精神发育迟滞者的刑事责任能力评定

本文对８０例精神发育迟滞有违法行为者的智力缺损程度、犯案动机、预谋、自我保护能力及对行为的辨认、控制能力等因素进行分析。鉴定结论，诊断为轻度精神发育迟滞者５８例（７２．５％），中度者１７例（２１．３％），重度者５例（６．２％）。评定无责任能力者１３例（１６．３％），限制责任能力４５例（５６．２％），完全责任能力２２例（２７．５％）。     

司法精神病学鉴定后的处理情况调查

目的为了维护社会安全和依法保障精神病人的合法权益，需要正确处理精神病违法者。实际上，人们对司法精神病学鉴定后的处理情况知之甚少。因此，进行此项调查研究。方法采用邮寄调查问卷的方式对四川省52个县市的183例精神病违法者进行调查。结果在处置精神病违法者的机关中，公安局占73．08％，法院占26．72％。有责任能力组中有2．22％被无罪释放；无责任能力组中有2．10％被判刑；部分责任能力组中有13．95％被无罪释放。结论公安局是处理精神病违法者的主要机构。存在不适当处置情况，尤其对部分责任能力者的处理更复杂、更困难。