Psychologists Role in the Court Room

Psychologists Role in the Court Room - Psychology and Law...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Psychology and Law Psychologists’ roles in the legal system My interactions with the cjs Scioto Village Time series study Fear of crime and media Dissertation MN inmates Trinidad Terms Forensic psychology Forensic psychologist Psychology and law Profiler Roles of psychologists in court Testify re sanity (at time of crime, to stand trial, to be executed) Custody hearings Child sexual abuse cases Rape trauma syndrome Battered spouse syndrome / PTSD Appeals about unfair jury composition Roles cont. Jury selection Prepare lawyers, defendants, witnesses Change of venue Testify re eyewitness validity issues Testify re stereotypes (Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins 1989) Statistical analysis on discrimination in employment, death penalty, death qualified jurors, non­unanimous juries Tensions between law and Tensions psychology psychology Innovative thinking vs stare decisis Psych empirical/law authoritarian Psych experimental/ law adversarial Psych descriptive/ law proscriptive Psych replication/ law case law Psych probabilistic/ law certain Psych abstract/ law applied Psych proactive/ law reactive Roles of expert witness Conduit/educator (tell all) Philosopher­ruler/advocate (tell your side) Hired gun (APA ethics forbid this/ must “prevent distortion, misuse, or suppression of psychological findings” Who’s expert enough? Frye v. US, 1923. early polygraph case. “well recognized standards for principles in field” Federal Rules of Evidence, 1975 “if evidence helps trier of facts” Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 1993/ birth defect after Bendectin (for morning sickness) Daubert cont. Said judge needs to assess quality of testimony and protect jurors from “scientific shamans” who’ll say anything for a price Appealed to SC, who said Frye too restrictive Daubert criteria Peer review Falsifiability Recognized error rate Adhere to professional standards General Electric Co. v. Joiner 1997 If gap between evidence and conclusions, testimony excluded Kumho Tire v. Carmichael 1999 Extended Daubert to nonscientific experts (e.g., tire expert) Briefs Brandeis Brief: prepared by lawyer and summarizes empirical and other evidence/ subset: Science translation brief, summarize a scientific issue Amicus Brief: friend of court Boy Scouts and gay issue Brown v. Board of Education 1954, Ken and Mamie Clark, nice looking dolls Death qualified juries ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/14/2011 for the course PSYC 372 taught by Professor Heath during the Spring '11 term at Loyola Chicago.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online