Chapter 2: The Legal Position and Organizational Forms of Forensic Psychiatric Expert Examination

The practical task of forensic psychiatry, which is one of the subdivisions of psychiatry, is to give an expert evaluation, on assignment from investigatory agencies and courts, and to devise and recommend measures for the prevention of socially dangerous acts by the mentally ill. Forensic psychiatric expert examination, like forensic medical, criminal, or any other type of expert examination, aids agencies of justice in establishing the facts in a case. Forensic psychiatric expert examination is called upon to assist the investigator and the court in determining whether an individual is a criminal or a legally irresponsible, mentally ill person; whether a person sentenced to a prison term should, because of mental illness, be released before his time is served; whether the investigator and the court may pursue the interrogation of a witness or victim with mental disorders, and whether the testimony of such persons may be used as court evidence. Such an expert examination is necessary in a civil suit in deciding the question of an individual's competence.     

Chapter 5: Forensic Psychiatric Expert Examination in Civil Proceedings. Problems of Incompetence of the Mentally Ill

Forensic psychiatric expert examination in civil proceedings is most often called upon to determine the extent of mental changes affecting the capacity of a person to understand the significance of his actions or to govern them. In connection with the coming into force of the Fundamentals of Civil Procedure of the USSR and the Union Republics on May 1, 1962, this type of expert examination has become much more frequent, inasmuch as the determination of legal competence has come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts.     

The presence of counsel at forensic psychiatric examinations

In virtually all situations involving forensic psychiatric assessments, the patient is represented by counsel. But does this fact entitle the lawyer to be present at the clinical evaluation? In a series of New York cases spanning a generation, judges have allowed presence of counsel at the psychiatric examination. The most common reason given for such a conclusion is to assure better cross-examination of the expert witness. Psychiatric evaluations mandated by law necessitate several guidelines different from those of the usual doctor/patient relationship. While we may have to accept the presence of attorneys in our consulting rooms, they should be observers only. To allow active intervention would distort the clinical process.     

Qualifying the psychiatrist as a lay witness: a reaction to the American Psychiatric Association petition in Barefoot v. Estelle

Organized psychiatry has recently begun to define limits to expert testimony. The American Psychiatric Association filed an amicus brief in the case of Barefoot v. Estelle urging legal curtailment of psychiatric testimony as to future dangerousness and prohibition on Constitutional grounds of expert psychiatric testimony solely based on hypothetical data. The Supreme Court refused relief on both questions. Psychiatric testimony to ultimate questions at law is limited by the inherent contextual variables of psychiatric clinical and experimental knowledge and practice. A forensic science model for psychiatric participation with explicit psychiatrically defined limitations is proposed using competence to stand trial as an example.     

Posttraumatic stress disorder in tort actions: forensic minefield

The authors discuss posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a basis for personal injury litigation. Three case examples raise issues related to: (1) the controversy surrounding expansion of tort liability, (2) the courtroom use of psychiatric nomenclature as represented in the DSM (e.g., PTSD), and (3) ethical concerns regarding psychiatric expert witnesses. Psychiatrists became easy targets when problems related to personal injury "stress" cases developed. A careful analysis, however, demonstrates that the issues are complex and multifaceted. For example, tort liability expansion was primarily instituted to compel a greater provision of liability insurance, not to reward stress claims. The increasing use of psychiatry's DSM in the courtroom has occurred despite explicit precautions against forensic application. Finally, the need for psychiatric expert witnesses has increased because courts have gradually usurped some psychiatric clinical prerogatives and because there has been a trend toward greater consideration of emotional pain and suffering. Although psychiatric expert witnesses have not been beyond reproach, critics have attempted to impeach the entire psychiatric profession for the questionable actions of the minority. The authors provide a detailed analysis of current problems, offer suggestions for improvement, and provide an educational counterpoint to the "hysterical invective" that often greets psychiatric testimony.     

论鉴定结论的质证

本文对鉴定结论质证的特殊内容、鉴定结论质证的主体以及鉴定结论质证中应注意的问题进行了分析，以探讨如何完善鉴定结论的质证。     

质疑对犯罪嫌疑人精神病鉴定期间的规定

我国刑事诉讼法和相关解释将对犯罪嫌疑人精神病鉴定的期间不计入羁押期限,是值得商榷的。应该认识到犯罪嫌疑人精神病鉴定在性质上类似于羁押,在德国和我国台湾等国家和地区,其是鉴定留置的一种类型,法律对其规定严格的实施要件,以防止对相对人权利不当的干涉。我国应从人权保障出发,在刑事诉讼法修改时,重新定位对犯罪嫌疑人精神病鉴定,并完善相关制度设置。     

如何建立我国鉴定结论采纳规则——以美国专家证言判断标准为参照

在我国司法实践中法官不够重视对鉴定结论的可靠性进行实质审查。美国专家证言采纳规则的先进性启示我们有必要对我国鉴定结论的审查认证进行反思。确立我国鉴定结论的采纳规则,尤其是确立鉴定结论可靠性的采纳规则,有助于防止某些伪科学进入法庭,防止法官滥用自由裁量权,从而对正确认证鉴定结论起到积极的推动作用。     

Forensic psychiatric expert witnessing within the criminal justice system in Germany

In recent years, the number of occupied beds in German forensic–psychiatric hospitals has continued to rise. Diversion refers to the removal of offenders from the criminal justice system at any stage of the procedure and court proceedings. There are no specific diversion programs in Germany but diversion does in fact happen via legal regulations that are based on the construct of legal responsibility. The assessments of responsibility as well as risk are the core tasks of forensic–psychiatric expert witnessing in Germany. Recommendations of an interdisciplinary working group serve as a guide to operationalize this forensic–psychiatric task. These recommendations list formal minimum requirements for expert reports on the question of criminal responsibility and risk assessment as well as minimum standards regarding content and in writing the report.     

英美法国家科学证据的历史沿革评述

从18世纪到20世纪,英美法国家有关科学证据的法庭运用,所表明的基本思想是,将科学证据评价的事实问题,通过三种方法转化为法律问题,以此保证法官在科学证据评价中承担更多的审查义务,以减少陪审团在科学证据判断上出错的可能性。这三种法律转化方法分别是,专家资格审查、专家证言的形式审查、专家证言的实质审查。这在20世纪的美国审判中,表现得更为突出。     

英美法国家科学证据的历史沿革评述

从18世纪到20世纪,英美法国家有关科学证据的法庭运用,所表明的基本思想是,将科学证据评价的事实问题,通过三种方法转化为法律问题,以此保证法官在科学证据评价中承担更多的审查义务,以减少陪审团在科学证据判断上出错的可能性。这三种法律转化方法分别是,专家资格审查、专家证言的形式审查、专家证言的实质审查。这在20世纪的美国审判中,表现得更为突出。     

Psychiatric expert testimony on aggressive offenders in juvenile court proceedings

The empirical study presented concerns juvenile court cases (aggressive offences) in West Berlin during which the offenders (N = 94) were subject to psychiatric expert testimony (1975-1982). The conditional factors determining forensic-psychiatric testimony are examined and the investigation shows, with the aid of discriminant analysis, that differences in the form of the expertise given are best explained by the variable 'convention-orientation'. Ratings on the quality of psychiatric letters (N = 49) were based on the semantic differential technique. Employing factor analysis, three independent aspects determining the quality of expert opinion are revealed, namely the factors 'cogency of message', role-conception', and 'recipient-orientation'.     

新刑诉法技术专家质证规则研究

新刑事诉讼法及新近出台相关司法解释中技术专家的出现将会对刑事诉讼中鉴定意见的质证产生很大影响.技术专家对刑事诉讼质证具有很强的必要性.我国刑事诉讼技术专家质证规则包括一般性规则、原理性规则、程序性规则.这些规则应当达到的效果包括司法与社会两个方面.     

Expert psychiatric evidence in sexual misconduct cases before state medical boards.

The growing problem of physician sexual misconduct has captured the attention not only of the medical and legal communities, but of the public as well. State medical boards, administrative agencies with generous rules of evidence and varying levels of expertise, face the difficult task of responding to patients' allegations of physician sexual abuse. This Article, based in large part on the author's survey of current state medical board practice, reveals an increasing reliance on expert psychiatric testimony to explain the behavior of complainants and accused physicians. Drawing analogies from the use of psychiatric evidence in child sexual abuse cases, the author examines the factors that boards must consider in determining the admissibility of expert testimony in physician sexual misconduct cases, and calls upon states to establish clear evidentiary rules to govern the use of such testimony in administrative hearings.     

Expert examination and assessment of state under the influence of psychoactive substances

An expert examination is a medical examination performed by a doctor on the order of a police officer or investigating judge. It includes a clinical examination of the subject, collection of samples for toxicological analysis, and the doctor's assessment of whether the subject is under the influence of psychoactive substances. The doctor requires expert knowledge, skill, experience and sufficient time to successfully perform the examination. Since the accurate assessment of the effects of psychoactive substances present depends on a comprehensive evaluation of toxicological test results, the calculation of results at the time of the event and the results of the medical examination, an unprofessionally performed examination can have far-reaching consequences, primarily legal in nature.     

The role of the psychiatrist in evaluating a prison mental health system in litigation

Federal courts during the past 14 years have recognized that many prisons in the United States have provided constitutionally inadequate medical and psychiatric services. Our recent national survey indicates that at least 20 states have had at least one part of their correctional system included in a certified class action suit that alleged insufficient mental health services for inmates. This article reviews the role of the expert psychiatric witness during the phases of litigation that involve proposed remedial plans and compliance in implementing remedial plans. Available epidemiologic data about psychiatric disorders among prison inmates, standards for correctional mental health care, and various mental health system models are briefly reviewed. A comprehensive approach to evaluating proposed remedial plans and assessing issues of compliance with accepted plans is described. Special attention is directed toward psychiatric issues unique to a correctional system.     

论专家辅助人意见——以刑事辩护为视角的分析

我国2012年新《刑事诉讼法》首次设立专家辅助人制度，对鉴定意见的质证提供了技术上的支持，对于刑事辩护来说意义重大。从证据法的角度看来，专家辅助人意见具有言词证据、意见证据、弹劾证据的多重属性，因此意见的内容应围绕鉴定意见中的专门性问题，并结合《刑事诉讼法》及相关司法解释对鉴定意见的审查判断规则来提出；而法庭对于鉴定意见的审查也应从准入资格与可靠性两方面进行，以免专家辅助人意见替代鉴定意见来主导审判。     

The diagnosis and forensic psychiatric expertise in infectious cerebral arachnoiditis

Neurologic and psychiatric examination of 32 patients with infectious cerebral arachnoiditis was performed. Psychopathic-like syndrome and intellectual deficiency were diagnosed in those patients and the correlation between high intracranial pressure and severity of mental disorders was established. Characteristics of forensic psychiatric examination of this group of patients are presented.     

The status of the forensic biological service in the Russian Federation in 1997]

The main parameters of the activities of forensic biological departments are analyzed for the year 1997. The staff, number of experts, number of expert evaluations and objects of examination, and work load per staff expert are presented. Shortcomings in the activities of departments are enumerated and recommendations for improving the quality of expert evaluations are offered.