Civil Legal Aid and Domestic Violence: a Review of the Literature and Promising Directions

This note summarizes extant research on civil legal aid, which includes provision of legal services for indigent and low-income individuals, and its applications for DV and IPV victims, and concludes with suggestions for improving service delivery and research in the field. Results of searches of online databases for peer-reviewed and non-peer reviewed articles, reports, analyses, and evaluations of civil legal aid in the United States were analyzed and critically assessed. Civil legal aid is a promising but underfunded and underexplored avenue for responding to and reducing domestic violence (DV), intimate partner violence (IPV), and their devastating effects. Providing civil counsel in divorce, custody, and protective order proceedings can significantly improve outcomes for DV and IPV victims and their children as well as serve as a cost-effective strategy for reducing violence and generating positive social returns.     

A Study of Juror and Jury Judgments in Civil Cases: Deciding Liability for Punitive Damages

A study was conducted to investigate civil juries' decisions concerning defendants' liability for punitive damages in tort cases. A total of 121 six-member mock juries composed of jury-service-eligible citizens were presented summaries of previously decided cases and given a comprehensive instruction on the defendant's liability for punitive damages. Most of the mock juries decided that the consideration of punitive damages was warranted, although appellate and trial judges had concluded that they were not warranted. The tendency to find the defendant liable was partly due to jurors' failure systematically to consider the full set of legally necessary conditions for the verdicts they rendered. Individual differences in the jurors' backgrounds were not strongly related to their verdicts; income and ethnicity were weakly related to judgments. The social processes in deliberation on civil juries were similar to the dynamics of deliberation that have been observed in criminal juries.     

Assisting the Courts in Understanding and Connecting with Experiences of Disconnection: Addressing Trauma-Related Dissociation as a Forensic Psychologist,Part I

Although trauma-related dissociation (TRD) is a common reaction to trauma often associated with significant impairment and prognoses that necessitate extended treatment, few assessors are knowledgeable about dissociation, its assessment, and methods for presenting information about it to courts in a way that is evidence-based yet understandable. This paper is the first part of a two-part series that aims to expand forensic assessors’ knowledge about TRD and enhance their ability to assess and present information about dissociation. This article provides overviews of research about dissociation and offers suggestions on how expert witnesses can assist counsel and courts in understanding dissociative reactions and their importance in personal injury cases. Specifically, we define dissociation; discuss the links between trauma, dissociation, and posttraumatic stress disorder; briefly review neurobiological findings related to dissociation; describe dissociative-related impairment and treatment; review challenges that can interfere with accepting and understanding dissociative symptoms; and suggest methods for helping counsel and courts accurately understand and consider TRD in assessing cases and deciding their outcomes.     

Trauma-Related Dissociation Is No Fantasy: Addressing the Errors of Omission and Commission in Merckelbach and Patihis (2018)

Dissociation is commonly a response to trauma that can be associated with significant impairment. In order to deal with dissociation in court from a comprehensive, scientifically informed, and valid perspective, Brand, Schielke, and Brams (Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 283-297, 2017a, b) provided a balanced view of dissociation, its characteristics, evidence base, and best assessment practices. Without an approach such as this, forensic experts risk having insufficient knowledge in its causation, phenomenology, and assessment and accordingly misunderstand trauma-related dissociation (TRD). Brand et al. (Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 283-297, 2017a, b) addressed this issue by providing an overview of TRD relevant to forensic contexts, acknowledging some of the erroneous and misinformed approaches to the topic. Merckelbach and Patihis (2018) offered a critique of Brand et al. (Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 283-297, 2017a, b) that illustrated this lack of knowledge and misunderstanding about TRD. Many of the statements made by these authors are conceptually inaccurate or scientifically misinformed. As we show, they were incorrect when they stated that research is lacking about the inter-rater reliability of dissociative disorder (DD) diagnoses. They were unaware of the error rates of tests and interviews among dissociative samples, which we present here. Merckelbach and Patihis challenged Brand et al., arguing their methods and literature review “lacked a connectivity to existing science” (p. 3), despite extensive citations of studies with DD patients. They argued that we failed to adequately consider malingering despite our discussions of empirically supported methods for assessing it. We show that Merckelbach and Patihis overlooked research that does not support their views. As we review their comments, we illustrate their pattern of misreading and misunderstanding our papers, as well as lapses in their reasoning. The current paper reinforces that in the forensic context, experts can acquire adequate understanding of TRD and its evidence base, and put forward arguments against any harsh critique of the area that is uninformed about, misunderstands, or includes omissions and errors in critical conceptualization, state-of-the-art assessment practices, and research methodology and results.     

Canine Population Data Generated from a Multiplex STR Kit for Use in Forensic Casework*

Abstract: Canine biological specimens are often part of the physical evidence from crime scenes. Until now, there have been no validated canine‐specific forensic reagent kits available. A multiplex genotyping system, comprising 18 short tandem repeats (STRs) and a sex‐linked zinc finger locus for gender determination, was developed for generating population genetic data assessing the weight of canine forensic DNA profiles. Allele frequencies were estimated for 236 pedigreed and 431 mixed breed dogs residing in the U.S. Average random match probability is 1 in 2 × 10³³ using the regional database and 1 in 4 × 10³⁹ using the breed dataset. Each pedigreed population was genetically distinct and could be differentiated from the mixed breed dog population but genetic variation was not significantly correlated with geographic transition. Results herein support the use of the allele frequency data with the canine STR multiplex for conveying the significance of identity testing for forensic casework, parentage testing, and breed assignments.     

Notes on the psychologist expert witness

The psychologist who takes the witness stand to testify concerning the reliability of an eyewitness's testimony should assume the role of a watchdog, not a lapdog for the prosecution or an attack dog for the defense. The watchdog role is illustrated by a discussion of the decisions made by the author before accepting an invitation to testify as an expert.