Demythologizing inaccurate perceptions of the insanity defense.

Horowitz

Australian Psychologist

et al. 1999

Although Australia does not currently have a death penalty law, an increasing concern about violent crime has raised the possibility that capital punishment, abolished in the 1960s, may be reconsidered. to determine the death penalty attitudes and potential jury behaviour of younger Australians, who have grown up without capital punishment, an experiment was conducted with 166 Australians, aged 18 to 30 years. Jurors who professed anti‐(29%) or pro‐ (71%) death penalty attitudes were exposed to one of four murder trials. Pro‐death penalty jurors were harsher in their sentencing, more likely to determine that the defendants had high volition and would be dangerous in the future, and were less likely to accept an insanity defence. The findings mirrored the profile of death qualified jurors in the United States.

Section: Sentencing Decisions: Effects Of the Characteristics Of The mentioning

confidence: 99%

Death penalty attitudes and juror decisions in australia

Horowitz

Australian Psychologist

et al. 1999

International Journal of Forensic Mental Health

“…Negative attitudes are associated with ideas that the insanity defense is abused and serves as a loophole for criminals to escape just punishment or that severely "sick" individuals should be held responsible for their criminal behavior irrespective of their mental illness (Ellsworth, Bukaty, Cowan, & Thompson, 1984;Hans, 1986;Silver, Circione, & Steadman, Downloaded by [Simon Fraser University] at 17:44 04 June 2016 1994). The reluctance of jurors to find in favor of the insanity defense is not surprising given that it has been demonstrated across diverse samples that the public consistently overestimates the actual use and success of the insanity defense (Blau, McGuinley, & Pasewark, 1993;Bloechl, Vitacco, Neumann, & Erickson, 2007;Skeem, Louden, & Evans, 2004) and underestimates the amount of time insanity acquittees spend in secure forensic hospitals (Miller, Maier, Van Rybroek, & Weidemann, 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Measuring Attitudes toward the Insanity Defense in Venirepersons: Refining the IDA-R in the Evaluation of Juror Bias

Vitacco

Malesky

Erickson

et al. 2009

The negative attitude against the insanity defense held by venirepersons has a direct effect on individuals with mental illness who are in contact with the criminal justice system. Identifying factors in jurors that support negative attitudes is critical in trying to ensure that the insanity defense is given full consideration when pleaded by people with mental illnesses. This article used the Insanity Defense Attitude scale-Revised (IDA-R; Skeem, Louden, & Evans, 2004) to evaluate attitudes and factors supporting bias in 239 venirepersons. Through the use of confirmatory factor analyses a refined factor model was developed for the IDA-R, which was cross-validated on a sample of 567 undergraduates. Greater support for the death penalty and higher perception of insanity defense use were both related to a more negative attitude toward the insanity defense. Implications for jury selection and the fair treatment of individuals with mental illness are discussed.Individuals with mental illnesses face formidable challenges when they invoke the insanity defense.

“…The truth of the matter is, however, that political realities continue to dominate commitment of insanity acquittees, no matter what the precise legal standards may be. Few acquittees, and certainly no acquittees who have committed serious crimes, are going to 'walk' fol-lowing their acquittal by reason of insanity even if the law in theory permits it and the offender technically satisfies the legal and medical criteria [29]. They will be hospitalised for a spell; a spell that in all probability will bear more relation to the seriousness of the offence than to medical or even true safety considerations.…”

Section: Changing the Focus Of Reform: Post-verdict Dispositional Issuesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Crime, Psychiatry and the Insanity Defence: A Report on Some Recent Reforms in the United States

Brakel¹,

Cavanaugh²

1996

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

There have been substantial developments in mental health law in the United States over the last 10-15 years. Once focal point has been the insanity defence, discussed here. The operational consequences of the legal changes remain to be assessed empirically, but informed speculation is possible. Both a description of the reforms and the assessment of their potential effect are relevant to members of the psychiatric profession in Australia, whether they be forensic specialists or traditional practitioners or researchers. Selective consideration of the American experience, as opposed to contemplating Wholesale transposition, is the appropriate posture for Australian policymakers.