The use of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) in assessing offenders

The intersection between the legal and mental health professions is sometimes marked by controversy, and the application of psychological assessments to forensic issues is no exception. However, the field of psychological assessment holds particular promise for clarifying decision making within the forensic arena, as it can bring a particularly well-established body of theory and data to bear upon clinical forensic practice. This article describes one psychometric instrument, the Personality Assessment Inventory, as an example of how particular assessment instruments can help inform this process.     

Psychological Assessment of Symptom and Performance Validity,Response Bias,and Malingering: Official Position of the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law

Evidence-based forensic psychological opinions require thorough and accurate information about examinees. Psychometric instruments can facilitate diagnostic decision making, but they rely on examinees to respond honestly to questions and put forth good effort on cognitive tests. Given the strong incentives for examinees in psychological injury cases to minimize prior problems and emphasize postaccident or posttrauma problems, the assessment of validity as part of forensic psychological evaluations is essential. Best practices in forensic psychology have their foundation in ethical principles. The purpose of this position statement is to promote ethical psychological practice in legal contexts by reviewing validity assessment issues and their ethical foundations. Because no previously published document focused specifically on symptom and performance validity assessment in psychological injury evaluations performed in forensic contexts, such a position statement provided by a professional organization devoted to the interface of psychological injury and law was needed to inform and guide practitioners and to educate other interested parties. The position statement emphasizes (a) the need for ethical practice in assessing validity, (b) consideration of factors such as culture and functional limitations, and (c) the importance of adopting a comprehensive, impartial, and scientific approach to validity assessment. The position statement acknowledges areas of differing opinions and the need for further research.     

Erratum to: Trends in Psychological/Psychiatric Injury and Law: Continuing Education, Practice Comments, Recommendations

This literature review of the major topics in the field of psychological/psychiatric injury and law is aimed at developing practice in the area. The field is a fast-developing one, with over ten major topics that it needs to integrate. In particular, the present review focuses on current work on: law (evidence, tort); forensic psychology; assessment and testing; psychological injuries (posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, traumatic brain injury, other); the APA DSM-5 draft (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders; American Psychiatric Association 2010); malingering; causality; multicultural considerations; disability; the American Medical Association (AMA) Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (Rondinelli et al. 2008); models; and treatment. At the end of each section of the article, practice comments introduce critical issues in applying the research to psychological work in the area. Whether undertaking tort evaluations, disability, and treatment plan assessments or treating individuals with psychological injuries, the professional needs state-of-the-art information in all the areas listed in order to remain scientifically informed, comprehensive, and impartial. The article concludes with recommendations for an integrated field in psychological/psychiatric injury and law, study in the field, research in its major areas, best practice policies, for example in assessment and treatment, and model building.     

Trends in Psychological/Psychiatric Injury and Law: Continuing Education, Practice Comments, Recommendations

This literature review of the major topics in the field of psychological/psychiatric injury and law is aimed at developing commentary for practice in the area. The field is a fast-developing one, with over ten major topics that it needs to integrate. In particular, the present review focuses current work on: law (evidence, tort); forensic psychology; assessment and testing; psychological injuries (posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, traumatic brain injury, other); the APA DSM-5 draft (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders; American Psychiatric Association 2010); malingering; causality; multicultural considerations; disability; the American Medical Association (AMA) Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (Rondinelli et al. 2008); models; and treatment. At the end of each section of the article, practice comments introduce critical issues in applying the research to psychological work in the area. Whether undertaking tort evaluations, disability, and treatment plan assessments or treating individuals with psychological injuries, the professional needs state-of-the-art information in all the areas listed in order to remain scientifically informed, comprehensive, and impartial. The article concludes with recommendations for an integrated field in psychological/psychiatric injury and law, study in the field, research in its major areas, best practice policies, for example in assessment and treatment, and model building.     

论法官直接认知与司法鉴定的界分

法官直接认知是法官直接对本案适用的法律、相关待证事实无需当事人举证证明或者在当事人举证已经达至证明标准时,直接加以确认形成内心确信的情形。司法鉴定是请求专家对案件事实或者证据事实出具相关意见的一种辅助证明活动。在我国的司法实践中存在着逃避法官直接认知而滥用司法鉴定的不良现象,应当在理论、立法和司法上准确理解法官直接认知和司法鉴定的功能与范围,二者不可简单替代,尤其不能以司法鉴定代替法官直接认知。     

构建海事司法鉴定机构的探索——以上海建设国际航运中心为视角

近年,海事、海商等涉海案件的数量逐年增长。海事诉讼案件中的待证事实多涉及专门性问题,需要通过科学实证予以鉴别和判断。上海在建设国际航运中心的同时根据国际法原则以及国际惯例,设立专门的海事司法鉴定机构已成为海事司法的必然要求。构建与完善海事司法鉴定机构对规范海事司法鉴定市场、维护当事人权益、保障社会法治建设、促进海事诉讼的审理与上海国际航运中心的建设都具有极为重要的意义。     

Evidentiary Standards for Forensic Anthropology*

Abstract: As issues of professional standards and error rates continue to be addressed in the courts, forensic anthropologists should be proactive by developing and adhering to professional standards of best practice. There has been recent increased awareness and interest in critically assessing some of the techniques used by forensic anthropologists, but issues such as validation, error rates, and professional standards have seldom been addressed. Here we explore the legal impetus for this trend and identify areas where we can improve regarding these issues. We also discuss the recent formation of a Scientific Working Group for Forensic Anthropology (SWGANTH), which was created with the purposes of encouraging discourse among anthropologists and developing and disseminating consensus guidelines for the practice of forensic anthropology. We believe it is possible and advisable for anthropologists to seek and espouse research and methodological techniques that meet higher standards to ensure quality and consistency in our field.     

Forensic mental health assessment in France: Recommendations for quality improvement

The quality of forensic mental health assessment has been a growing concern in various countries on both sides of the Atlantic, but the legal systems are not always comparable and some aspects of forensic assessment are specific to a given country. This paper describes the legal context of forensic psychological assessment in France (i.e. pre-trial investigation phase entrusted to a judge, with mental health assessment performed by preselected professionals called “experts” in French), its advantages and its pitfalls. Forensic psychiatric or psychological assessment is often an essential and decisive element in criminal cases, but since a judiciary scandal which was made public in 2005 (the Outreau case) there has been increasing criticism from the public and the legal profession regarding the reliability of clinical conclusions. Several academic studies and a parliamentary report have highlighted various faulty aspects in both the judiciary process and the mental health assessments. The heterogeneity of expert practices in France appears to be mainly related to a lack of consensus on several core notions such as mental health diagnosis or assessment methods, poor working conditions, lack of specialized training, and insufficient familiarity with the Code of Ethics. In this article we describe and analyze the French practice of forensic psychologists and psychiatrists in criminal cases and propose steps that could be taken to improve its quality, such as setting up specialized training courses, enforcing the Code of Ethics for psychologists, and calling for consensus on diagnostic and assessment methods.     

Anthropological measurement of lower limb and foot bones using multi-detector computed tomography

Anthropological examination of defleshed bones is the gold standard for osteological measurement in forensic practice. However, multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) offers the opportunity of three-dimensional imaging of skeletal elements, allowing measurement of bones in any plane without defleshing. We present our experiences of the examination of 15 human lower limbs in different states of decomposition using MDCT. We present our method of imaging and radiological measurement of the bones including sex assessment. The radiological measurements were undertaken by three professional groups--anthropology, radiology, and forensic pathology--both at the site of scanning and at a remote site. The results were compared to anthropological oestological assessment of the defleshed bones. We discuss the limitations of this technique and the potential applications of our observations. We introduce the concept of remote radiological anthropological measurement of bones, so-called tele-anthro-radiology and the role that this could play in providing the facility for standardization of protocols, international peer review and quality assurance schemes.     

Interdisciplinary approaches to the teaching of forensic science in the Forensic Science Undergraduate Program of the National Autonomous University of Mexico,before and after COVID-19

In 2013, the Forensic Science Undergraduate Program (FSUP) at the National Autonomous University of Mexico was created in response to an alarming criminal situation in Mexico, as well as to the radical reform of its criminal justice system. Its mission is to educate and train ethical, critical, and humanistic forensic scientists capable of conducting inquiries that meet scientific quality standards and assist the justice system in firmly linking legal rulings to the available evidence. At the time, it was the first such program in the country, and the contributions that interdisciplinary forensic scientists could make to criminal investigations were largely unknown among forensic and legal practitioners. During its existence, providing an interdisciplinary, competence-based education to students has been one of the main challenges. To overcome it, teaching and assessment approaches—centered on the achievement of specifically forensic competencies as learning outcomes and the integration of forensic disciplines towards the resolution of simulated cases—have been devised to help develop the professional skill set expected of graduates. The COVID-19 pandemic led to adapting these approaches to distance or hybrid modes of learning, increasing their versatility and enriching the pedagogic repertoire of the FSUP. Currently, the main impact of the program lies in the successful incorporation of some of its graduates to agencies belonging to or related to the criminal justice system, such as the National Prosecutor’s Office, the Commission for Truth and Justice for the Ayotzinapa Case, and the National Commission for the Search of Missing and Disappeared Persons, among others.     

Doing justice to justice

Adshead's recognition that only when taken together can the many different conceptions of justice accommodate what is called for in the particularly demanding setting of forensic mental health care, is to be applauded. Each must be honoured and built into the systems of assessment and treatment that are the tasks of the forensic psychiatrist, she demonstrates. Adshead's far‐reaching revisions could resolve much that is troubling about the present practice of forensic psychiatry. Yet how much these revisions can overcome the moral dilemmas associated with dual roles in forensic psychiatry, is not so clear.     

Neuroscience and Neurolaw

At the intersection of neuroscience and psychological science stands neuropsychology, providing patients, triers of fact, and other parties a quantifiable, evidence-based method for understanding cognitive, emotional, and behavioral changes that occur in the context of injury or disease. The purposes of this special issue of Psychological Injury and Law are to (1) illustrate the ways in which neuroscience, psychological practice, professional ethics, and laws are intertwined in the evaluation and treatment of persons who have been injured or are experiencing a neurological disease, (2) demonstrate the ways in which neuropsychological practice is applied to forensic questions, and (3) promote quality neuropsychological practice and services to patients, courts, and other consumers of neuropsychological services. This special issue provides a sample of the types of ways that practitioners integrate neuroscience and clinical psychology, informed by and consistent with relevant laws and professional ethics, to understand people who have cognitive, emotional, and/or behavioral problems stemming from neurological injuries or other disorders.     

法证披露模型:应当向法证专家披露什么和法证专家应当披露什么?

法律上的披露问题主要集中在检控方向辩护方提供或者隐瞒了哪些证据。在本文中,我们将披露的概念扩展到更广泛的情境下,在这种情境下,披露失误可能导致误判。我们引入了一个概念模型,即“法证信息披露”,它涉及哪些信息应该披露给法证检验人员,以及法证检验人员应当披露哪些信息。本文全面概述了四类利益相关者的动态交互:法证服务、调查、法律和外部利益相关者。我们通过五个问题讨论了法证信息披露模式的有效实施,即如果要向法证检验人员或者由法证检验人员提供最好的信息,以提高法证决策质素,并尽量减少偏差,则什么时候进行披露?披露什么?如何披露?向谁披露?为什么披露?     

A review of the historical use and criticisms of gait analysis evidence

The use of gait analysis is a well-established facet of practice for many professions and a fundamental aspect of clinical practice. In recent times, gait analysis evidence has emerged as a new area of forensic practice. As its use has continued to spread and develop, the area of work has come under close scrutiny and subsequent criticism. The purpose of this paper is to examine the historical use of gait analysis evidence and consider the criticisms of this work. Through the use of the historical records of cases within the public domain it has been determined that gait analysis as evidence was first presented in court over 175?years ago, although it has only been utilized by experts in more recent times. The quality of analysis underpinning such evidence has been variable, and has been undertaken by both non-expert and expert witnesses. The work undertaken by expert witnesses appears to have been both non-scientific and scientific in nature, though there is limited reporting of cases involving scientific approaches. Given the variation in the quality of the methodologies utilized, there is the potential for confusion within the courts, where it may be difficult for the judge or jury to determine the appropriate weight that can be attributed to the evidence. It is concluded that future publications should explore the scientific basis of forensic gait analysis to evaluate standards, reliability and validity, as well as reporting the methodologies utilized in relevant cases in the field. It is also recommended that courts consider in greater depth an expert's theoretical approach and experience prior to admitting their evidence. The publication of ‘Forensic gait analysis: a primer for courts’, although limited in some aspects of its consideration of practice, is a welcome addition to the information available for guidance.     

The 4 Ds of Forensic Mental Health Assessments of Personal Injury

The field of psychiatric/psychological injury and law concerns tort and other legal claims for injuries sustained in events at issue, such as in motor vehicle accidents (MVAs), worker compensation, or the veteran affairs (VA). The 4 Ds refer to the requirement that legal action in these types of cases can proceed when there is a duty, the duty has been discharged with dereliction, the resultant act has caused directly tortious harm, and damages are applicable. In contrast, the related 4 Cs refer to the conditions of effective forensic testimony. The principles of forensic mental health assessment (FMHA; Heilbrun et al., 2009) underscore the scientific requirements in forensic assessments, as do the American Psychological Association’s (APA, 2013) forensic specialty guidelines. For example, Brodsky’s maxims for effective work in court (Brodsky & Gutheil, 2016) cover a broad spectrum of ethical and practice guidelines for the profession. Similarly, Young (2016 a, b, c) has specified the parameters of admissible evidence in court, functioning ethically for the court, and the need to be comprehensive, scientifically informed, and impartial in forensic mental health assessments. All these sources lead to an integrated set of the principles for effective and ethical practice in the forensic arena of mental health work, referred here as the 4 Ds for the field of psychiatric/psychological injury and law. These revised 4 D principles involve Dignity, Distance, Data, and Determinations.     

Sexually 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 statute is worded differently, three main elements common to sexually violent predator evaluations are used to guide evaluators: mental abnormality, volitional capacity, and likelihood of future sexual violence. The current article presents empirical evidence for the main tenants of these forensic evaluations, provides recommendations for evaluators in light of current limitations of evidence, and offers suggestions for future research in this area of forensic assessment.     

骨盆骨折伤残重新鉴定65例分析

目的 研究有争议的交通事故受伤人员骨盆骨折伤残等级评定案例,分析其在初次鉴定中暴露出来的问题,探讨如何正确理解与把握骨盆骨折的鉴定条款,建立科学的判定标准。方法 收集上海市司法鉴定中心2006—2013年道路交通事故致骨盆骨折伤残等级重新鉴定案例65例,对初次鉴定和重新鉴定的资料进行分析比较。结果 鉴定时机不当,鉴定材料收集不全面,鉴定人对骨盆骨折条款的理解有误及其他一系列问题是重新鉴定意见改变伤残等级的主要原因。结论 针对上述问题,应该从提高鉴定人专业技能,建立统一判定标准等方面来提高此类案件的鉴定质量。     

Examining the Science and Practice of Violence Risk Assessment with Female Adolescents

While the field of violence risk assessment among adult males has progressed rapidly, several questions remain with respect to the application of forensic risk assessment tools within other populations. In this article, we consider the empirical evidence for the assessment, prediction, and management of violence in adolescent girls. We discuss limitations of generalizing violence risk assessment findings from other populations to adolescent girls and point out areas where there is little or no empirical foundation. Critical issues that must be addressed in research prior to the adoption or rejection of such instruments are delineated. Finally, we provide practice guidelines for clinicians currently involved with adolescent females within risk assessment contexts.     

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.     

毒物鉴定信息资源介绍及法医毒物学数据库构想

信息资源作为现代社会的一种重要资源,在各专业领域中显示出其无可替代的价值。毒物鉴定同样需要专业信息的强有力支持。根据法医毒物鉴定实践的信息需求,对可能涉及的相关信息资源来源,尤其是网络在线数据库资源进行综述和评价。同时,探究了建立适合毒物鉴定专业需求的＂法医毒物数据库及其信息平台＂的可行性和设计构思,并对其应用做出展望。