Factors associated with the conditional release of persons acquitted by reason of insanity: A decision tree approach.

Abstract

Most NGRI (nol guilty by reason of insanity) acquittees are hospitalized for some period of time following acquittal, which raises the q!~eslion of when an individual can be safely released into the community. The conditional release (CR) of persons acquitted hy reason of insanil}~ therefore, provokes the question of public safety. This study examines the CR systems in four stales-Connecticut, lIth'ryland, New lbrk, and Ohio. A study sample of 529 persons acquilted as NGRl from 1985 to 1987 was followed lip for al least five years to de/mnille who is conditionally released. Following a description of the CR system.\~ findings suggestive of the role of dangerousness and diagnosis as prediclOrs of CR are presented. Personal characteristics are also significant factors in predicting who will be released. The lmgth of hospitalization for this populatioll and other descriptive faclOrs sudl as history of hospitalization, arrests, substance abuse, family violence, and living arrangements are also addressed.John Hinckley, thl: wuuld-bl: assassin uf President Ronald Reagan, is a noteworthy defendant in the insanity defense debate during the 20th century. A successful plea of insanity in 1982 placcd Hinckley and the insanity defense front stage as "Exhibit 1" as to what is wrong with the system. A decade later, in 1992, Jeffrey Dahmer, Milwaukcc's serial killcr/cannibal, was unsuccessful with an insanity plea, but his case nonctheless elicited intense debate about the merit (or lack thereof) of the insanity defensc. These periodic visible trials force a rehashing of legislative initiativcs, some more extensive than others, such as the abolition of the insanity plea or the institution of a guilty but mentally ill (GBMI) statute. 4The controvcrsy concerning John Hinckley did not end with his acquittal. In April 1987 Hinckley requcsted an unescortcd off-grounds leave to spend Easter

Are release recommendations for NGRI acquittees informed by relevant data?

“…Although length of stay (LOS) was not a correlate of release recommendations in the present study, the average LOS for all patient groups was quite extensive (6 yearsþ) in comparison to other studies (Callahan & Silver, 1998;Way, Smith, & Sawyer, 2004).…”

“…Demographic variables were selected based on a review of the literature demonstrating a relationship among specific static risk factors and the likelihood of conditional release (e.g. Callahan & Silver, 1998;Hilton & Simmons, 2001). …”

“…In other work conducted by Callahan and Silver (1998), the conditional release process of patients found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) in four states was evaluated. Eight demographic variables were investigated to determine their relationship to conditional release decisions.…”

Evaluator Agreement in Placement Recommendations for Insanity Acquittees

“…Generally, the available evidence suggests that more serious crimes are associated with hospital commitment and longer periods of inpatient treatment, although findings are not universal in this regard. Callahan and Silver () reported that, in three out of four states surveyed, individuals acquitted of more serious offenses, such as violent or sexual crimes, were as likely as those acquitted of other crimes to obtain conditional release. In the fourth state, acquittees with more serious offenses were more likely to be hospitalized than released.…”

Criminal Justice Outcomes of Those Appearing before the Mental Health Tribunal: A Record Linkage Study

“…According to this view, revocation acts as a preventative measure before reoffending can occur. However, it has been recommended that prior to making such conclusions there is a need to examine sample characteristics to ensure similar groups are being examined (Wiederanders, Bromley, & Choate, 1997), while Callahan and Silver (1998) have stated that both system-specific and individual-level variables affect revocation rates. Furthermore, Harris (2000), has reported that this relationship between conditional leave revocation and reoffending may be accounted for by length of hospitalisation, for example, states with shorter hospital stays had both higher rates of rearrest and revocation.…”