Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Historical timeline of death penalty

procon_org: Historical Timeline of the Death Penalty from 1700 BC to
Original Tweet:
Sent via TweetDeck (

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Atkins MR/ID death penalty listserv update: n=58

I'm pleased to announce that the public Atkins MR/ID death penalty listserv currently has a membership of 58 members.  If you want to plug into some discussion of Atkins related issues, consider joining.  You can join by finding the picture icon in this post on the blog side bar and clicking on the image for more information, and then sign up directly at the Yahoo box below.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Flynn Effect report series: Is the Flynn Effect a Scientifically Accepted Fact? IAP AP101 Report #7

Another new IAP Applied Psychometrics 101 report (#7) is now available.  The report is the second in the Flynn Effect series, a series of brief reports that will define, explain and discuss the validity of the Flynn Effect (click here to access all prior FE related posts at the ICDP blog) and the issues surrounding the application of a FE "adjustment" for scores based on tests with date norms (norm obsolescence), particularly in the context of Atkins MR/ID capital punishment cases.  The abstract for the brief report is presented below.  The report can be accessed by clicking here.

Report # 1 (What is the Flynn Effect) can be found by clicking here.

This report is the second in a series of brief reports the will define, explain, and summarize the scholarly consensus regarding the validity of the Flynn Effect (FE). This brief report presents a summary of the majority of FE research (in tabular form of n=113 publications) which indicates (via a simple “vote tally” method) that despite no consensus regarding the possible causes of the FE, it is overwhelming recognized as a fact by the scientific community. The series will conclude with an evaluation of the question whether a professional consensus has emerged regarding the practice of adjusting dated IQ test scores for the Flynn Effect, an issue of increasing debate in Atkins MR/ID capital punishment hearings.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

The Flynn Effect report series: What is the Flynn Effect: IAP AP101 Report #6

A new IAP Applied Psychometrics 101 report (#6) is now available.  The report is the first in the Flynn Effect series, a series of brief reports that will define, explain and discuss the validity of the Flynn Effect (click here to access all prior FE related posts at the ICDP blog) and the issues surrounding the application of a FE "adjustment" for scores based on tests with date norms (norm obsolescence), particularly in the context of Atkins MR/ID capital punishment cases.  The abstract for the brief report is presented below.  The report can be accessed by clicking here.
Norm obsolescence is recognized in the intelligence testing literature as a potential source of error in global IQ scores.  Psychological standards and assessment books recommend that assessment professionals use tests with the most current norms to minimize the possibility of norm obsolescence spuriously raising an individual’s measured IQ.  This phenomenon is typically referred to as the Flynn Effect.  This report is the first in a series of brief reports the will define, explain, and summarize the scholarly consensus regarding the validity of the Flynn Effect.  The series will conclude with an evaluation of the question whether a professional consensus has emerged regarding the practice of adjusting dated IQ test scores for the Flynn Effect, an issue of increasing debate in Atkins MR/ID capital punishment hearings.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 28, 2010

Reprints Available--Sellers 2006 on Malingering

From the Atkins DP Listserv 

From: "R.K. McKinzey, Ph.D." <>
Date: June 28, 2010 7:12:23 PM CDT
Subject: [atkinsmrdeathpenalty] WPE: Reprints Available--Sellers 2006


This has been added to WPE's Reprints Available page:

Sellers, S., Byrne, M. K., & Golus, P. (2006). The Detection of
Malingered Psychopathology and Cognitive Deficits: Employing the Fake
Bad Scale and the Ravens Standard Progressive Matrices. Psychiatry,
Psychology and Law, 13(1), 91-99.

The feigning of cognitive deficits and the feigning of
psychopathology are generally regarded as two separate domains of
malingering. Malingering detection techniques have usually been
developed and applied with this distinction in mind. This study is
one of the first to integrate malingering detection approaches across
the cognitive and psychological domains. Three groups of Australian
university students (N = 102) completed Lees-Haley, English and
Glenn's (1991) Fake Bad Scale (FBS) and Raven's (1989) Standard
Progressive Matrices (RSPM). For both instruments, the first group
was instructed to respond accurately and truthfully to all items, the
second group to fake cognitive deficits and the third group to fake
psychopathology. As predicted, the FBS was effective when used alone,
with an overall sensitivity of 81%, and no false positives. The FBS
was equally sensitive to the malingering of cognitive deficits and
psychopathology; a similar pattern of results was obtained for two
subtests of the RSPM. It was concluded that malingerers tend not to
discriminate between cognitive and psychological test instruments
when feigning either type of symptom. (PsycINFO Database Record (c)
2010 APA, all rights reserved)

R.K. McKinzey, Ph.D.
Editor, WebPsychEmpiricist:

Recent Activity:
The Atkins ID/MR Death Penalty listserv is associated with the ICDP (Intellectual Competence and Death Penalty) blog @

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.



Psychologists and ethics in international settings. Special issue of Ethics and Behavior

The journal Ethics and Behavior had a special issue devoted to ethical issues for psychologists working in international settings.  Below are abstracts and citations for three of the articles.  Anyone who would like to read one of the complete articles, in exchange for a subsequent "brief" guest blog post, should contact the blogmaster @

Foster, D. F. (2010). Worldwide Testing and Test Security Issues: Ethical Challenges and Solutions. Ethics &
Behavior, 20(3-4)
, 207-228.
As psychology ethics begins to become more standardized and formalized globally (e.g., Gauthier, 2007) there are still educational, political, and psychological areas that require significant discussion. For example, test security has become a global issue, as psychological tests and even college entrance and graduate school admission tests have found their way online.

Gauthier, J., Pettifor, J., & Ferrero, A. (2010). The Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists: A Culture-Sensitive Model for Creating and Reviewing a Code of Ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 20(3-4),

Psychologists live in a globalizing world where traditional boundaries are fading and, therefore, increasingly work with persons from diverse cultural backgrounds. The Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists provides a moral framework of universally acceptable ethical principles based on shared human values across cultures. The application of its moral framework in developing codes of ethics and reviewing current codes may help psychologists to respond ethically in a rapidly changing world. In this article, a model is presented to demonstrate how to use the Universal Declaration as a guide for creating or reviewing a code of ethics. This model may assist psychologists in various parts of the world in establishing codes of ethics that will promote global understanding and cooperation while respecting cultural differences. The article describes the steps involved in the application of the model and provides concrete examples as well as several useful comments and suggestions. This guide for the application of the Universal Declaration may also be used for consultation, education, and training relative to the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists.
Leach, M. M., & Oakland, T. (2010). Displaying Ethical Behaviors by Psychologists When Standards Are Unclear. Ethics & Behavior, 20(3-4), 197-206.
Psychologists recognize the need to know and adhere to the ethics code in the country or countries in which they work. However, most countries do not have ethics codes that govern the work of psychologists. Thus, psychologists working in countries that do not have an ethics code face a dilemma: They need to behave ethically yet do not know the guidelines or standards that govern these behaviors. This article highlights some cross-national conditions about which psychologists should be aware when working cross-nationally, especially in countries that may lack an ethics code. These include knowledge of the host country's prevailing moral values, its laws and administrative policies, and ethics codes as well as policies approved by international agencies and associations. Eight guidelines are provided for psychologists working in host countries that lack ethics codes.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Research Brief 6-28-2010: Characteristics of criminal offenders with and without mild MR/ID

I previously made an iPost about this article.  I've finally read it.  I believe the information on the characteristics of offenders with and without MR/ID is particularly useful, esp. for fighting some of the common stereotypes of individuals with mild MR/ID.  I am only presenting select information from the article.  The article deals with other topics not highlighted here.

Salekin, Karen L. , Olley, J. Gregory and Hedge, Krystal A.(2010. Offenders With Intellectual Disability: Characteristics, Prevalence, and Issues in Forensic Assessment.  Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 3(2), 97 — 116

Although the problem of people with disabilities as victims of crime has been well recognized, the known characteristics of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) also make them vulnerable to becoming perpetrators of crimes. Most such crimes are minor, but the 2002 Atkins v. Virginia decision called national attention to people with ID and people with dual diagnoses who commit capital crimes. This article reviews the data on offenders with intellectual and dual disabilities and the challenges related to their diagnoses and their roles in the criminal justice system. Offenders with ID are overwhelmingly individuals with mild intellectual disability, and their characteristics largely resemble those of offenders who do not have an ID diagnosis. They do not engage predominantly in any one form of criminal behavior, and their readily identifiable characteristics do not set them apart from offenders without a disability. However, their intellectual limitations make it more difficult for them to understand their Miranda rights; to work effectively with their attorneys; or for those found incompetent to stand trial, to profit from formal programs to restore them to competency. Assessment methods, particularly assessment of malingering of ID, have many limitations when applied in the criminal justice setting.

Below are select highlights extracted from this important article.  All are direct quotes unless otherwise indicated.  Emphasis (italic and/or bold font) made by blogmaster.

  • At the most fundamental level, individuals with ID have problems learning, and it has been suggested that the term general learning disorder may be more accurate than either mental retardation or intellectual disability (Baroff, 1999).
  • Individuals with ID learn more slowly than do typically developing individuals and have significant problems learning abstract concepts and skills.
  • often exhibit cognitive rigidity (see, e.g., Dulaney & Ellis, 1997; Kounin, 1941; Lewin, 1936), have problems with attention (see, e.g., Tomporowski & Tinsley, 1997), demonstrate slow information processing, and have difficulty planning and implementing complex behavior (Ferretti & Cavalier, 1991).
  • have been found to learn via imitation of others and to rely more on cues from others than do typically developing individuals (see Balla & Zigler, 1979, for a review).
  • With regard to offending, it may be that the outerdirectedness and passive learning style of individuals with ID play a role in their becoming involved in the criminal justice system. For example, they may desire to fit in with a group of individuals and may engage in illegal activities in order to do so.
  • In addition to difficulties in formal learning, people with ID commonly have problems in social learning, and impairments in this area can present as personality characteristics. Many studies have shown the tendency of children and adults with ID to have a heightened motivation for social reinforcement (Balla & Zigler, 1979), which can be seen in their tendency to do things to please others.
  • These individuals also tend to have low expectations of success and, consequently, often fail to take initiative (Cromwell, 1963; MacMillan, 1969; Ollendick, Balla, & Zigler, 1971).
  • When considering the three areas of adaptive functioning—conceptual, social, and practical (AAIDD, 2010)—it is in the area of practical skills that the majority of people with ID are more likely to demonstrate success. Individuals with ID are likely to have relative strengths in the acquisition of basic information and in the completion of tasks that are concrete, familiar, and have practical application in everyday life. Skills that can be learned through repetition are usually easier to acquire than are skills that require abstract understanding.
  • An example of a skill set that involves both practical and conceptual skills is that of money use. Suto, Claire, Holland, and Watson (2006) demonstrated that individuals with mild ID can recognize denominations of money and make simple purchases, but they often have problems counting change and budgeting money.
  • Given appropriate educational support, individuals with mild ID can learn to read, write, and become gainfully employed (see, e.g., American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000, p. 43), but without such supports, they have poor employment potential and are at increased risk for engaging in criminal activity.
  • Once out of school, individuals with IQs at the high end of the mild ID range often blend into the general population; they have friends, marry, have children, and only need assistance during periods of personal or economic stress (APA, 2000; Baroff, 1999).

THE OFFENDER WITH ID Prevalence of ID in the Criminal Justice System
  • Recent data indicate that at any time between 4% and 14% of incarcerated individuals in the United States have a diagnosis of ID (Petersilia, 2000), with rates of 0% to 2.8% reported when examining aggregate data from six countries (Fazel, Xenitidis, & Powell, 2008).
  • Comparison of available research on the prevalence of ID in the criminal justice system is extremely difficult because research samples are not always representative of “true” ID offenders, and the method by which they obtain the data varies substantially among studies
  • it appears that the prevalence of ID in the offender population may be greater than that of the general population, as is the prevalence of low cognitive ability that does not meet threshold for the diagnosis.

Characteristics of Offenders with ID
  • are likely to be functioning at the mild level (IQ approximately 55–70).
  • it would be expected that these individuals have had some success in independent living, have been employed in labor jobs or other jobs that require only limited cognitive skill, and have been part of a social network.
  • individuals with mild ID are less likely to be identified as having a disability because their outward presentation is not recognizably different from the nonimpaired population.
  • due to their limitations in cognitive functioning, they are more vulnerable to the negative influences of typical offenders who reside in the community and, if raised in a home where one or more individuals engage in criminal behavior, they are more likely to follow this course rather than carving out a separate existence.
  • In reality, individuals with ID at the upper end of the continuum are, in most respects, no different from their counterparts who score slightly higher on an IQ test and/or who demonstrate less impairment in day-to-day functioning. Thus, it is not surprising that research has not borne out the previously held notion that ID offenders are fundamentally different from non-ID offenders.
  • There exist a handful of prevalence studies on psychiatric illness and offenders with ID (see, e.g., Jones, 2007; Mannynsala et al., 2009; Riches et al., 2006). Data obtained from an examination of 44 pretrial reports showed that comorbidity was high (prevalence rate of psychiatric illness equal to 89%), with the three most common diagnoses being “any substance abuse/dependence” (68%), alcohol abuse/dependence (45%), and antisocial personality disorder (25%; Mannynsala et al., 2009). Psychotic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and depressive disorder were low at 5%, 5%, and 2%, respectively.

  • the role of the mental health professional within the legal realm is to provide the trier of fact with “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge” (Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 702; hereafter referred to as Rule 702) that assists the Court in making a determination in that case.
  • Issues of importance include the use of abbreviated measures of intelligence (see, e.g., Axelrod, 2002), practice effects on intelligence tests (see, e.g., Basso, Carona, Lowery, & Axelrod, 2002), variability in test scores over time and across setting (see, e.g., Bracken, 1988), validity of measurement of malingering for individuals with ID (see, e.g., Salekin & Doane, 2009), the Flynn effect (see, e.g., Flynn, 1984, 1987, 2009; Hiscock, 2007; Spitz, 1989; Truscott & Frank, 2001), and the use of clinical judgment in the assessment of ID (Schalock & Luckasson, 2005).
  • With regard to trial level participation, the two most common forensic evaluations are (a) comprehension of Miranda rights and (b) competence to stand trial; this is true regardless of whether the defendant has an ID.
  • Research has consistently found that individuals with ID demonstrate problems understanding their rights and that their suggestibility and tendency to acquiesce make them particularly vulnerable to providing involuntary confessions

  • Research presented in this review demonstrates that offenders with ID are, in many respects, similar to those who do not have ID. In comparison with nonoffenders, the general offender population tends to have lower measured intelligence, be less educated, come from lower socioeconomic status, and come from chaotic home environments.
  • In fact, we cannot “see” the offender with ID any more obviously than we can “see” the offender without ID. There are no labels on their backs, and there are often no obvious signs that they are impaired enough to warrant attention. That said, underneath what appear to be typical offenders lie true differences in cognitive abilities that can dramatically affect their ability to function within the criminal justice system.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Law Review Article: Admitting Doubt: A New Standard for Scientific Evidence

I am not a lawyer, but I find reading law review articles relevant to Atkins cases interesting...and they help me better understand the legal issues and court proceedings.  I found the recent Harvard Law Review note Admitting Doubt:  A New Standard for Scientific Evidence very interesting.  It deals extensively with standards of evidence and expert testimony and a specific focus on the Daubert standard.

As I learn more about Atkins proceedings, I've learned that there is a distinct distinction between legal and scientific standards of evidence and procedures.  As a social scientist who deals with probability-based research and methods, I found the following section particularly illuminating.  My guess is that psychologists who provide expert testimony in Atkins hearings are often frustrated with the different view that legal proceedings take toward evidence and the determination of truth.

Indeed, law and science take a number of different views on the determination of truth. At a structural level, the judicial system typically relies on zealous advocacy — within certain ethical bounds — to reach conclusions, while the scientific community tends to follow an organized skepticism model based on critical peer review.72 At a more detailed level, science and law treat causation differently:

  • The law demands certainty and finality and generally forces its participants to render decisions and verdicts in binary pairs, such as causation/no causation and liability/no liability, even where evidence is ambiguous, uncertain, complex, and immature. In contrast, the scientific enterprise generally embraces probability and uncertainty and does not require the occasionally premature dichotomization of outcomes often required by the courts

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Use of WJ III NU Cognitive and Achievement batteries in Canada: ASB #12 Report now available

ASB #12 Use of the Woodcock-Johnson III NU Tests of Cognitive Abilities and Tests of Achievement with Canadian Populations  is now available for download at the Riverside Publishing web site (click here).

As described at the Riverside web page:
This bulletin examines the use of the Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update (WJ III NU) Tests of Cognitive Abilities and Tests of Achievement  with a random sample of 310 school-age Canadian students. Results were compared with a matched sample of U.S. subjects selected from the WJ III NU standardization sample using WJ III NU norms. While some minor score differences are reported across the two samples, the study findings generally support the use of the U.S.-based WJ III NU norms with Canadian school-age populations.

Conflict of interest - I am a coauthor of the WJ III battery.  Complete conflict of interest disclosure information is available via a link on the blog roll side bar of this blog.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 21, 2010

Forensic psychology and law conferences and workshops

Court Decision: Hill v Schofield (GA, 2010): "Beyond reasonable doubt" in doubt in GA ID/MR Atkins ruling

As noted in a brief post yesterday, with a link to the Sentencing and Law Policy blog, a panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision (Hill v Schofield; GA, 2010) that potentially could have wide-ranging consequences for many Atkins cases. The court declared Georgia's intellectual disability/death penalty statute was unconstitutional insofar as it placed the burden of proof on the defendant "beyond a reasonable doubt" (the highest standard required in court).  The court stated,

By imposing the overwhelming majority of the risk of error on the defendant in its application of the most stringent standard possible, Georgia holds that it is far better to erroneously execute a mentally retarded person than to erroneously impose a life sentence on one not mentally retarded. Requiring a defendant to prove mental retardation beyond a reasonable doubt is appropriate only if the interests of a state in maximizing the number of death sentences outweigh the constitutional right of mentally retarded offenders not to be executed. This state interest, however, is not constitutionally permissible at the cost of violating the constitutional right of a  mentally retarded offender not to be executed.

Hill v. Schofield, __ F. 3d __ , Case No. 08-15444 (11th Cir., June 18, 2010), slip op. at pgs. 14-15.

However, the decision was not without strong dissent.  I am no lawyer, but a few folks I know withknowledge of these matters suggest that it is likely that the state will ask for a a rehearing in front of the entire array of the 11th circuit's judges, a procedure known as motion for rehearing en banc. A motion for rehearing is (according to my sources) a prerequisite for seeking review by the SCOTUS.

Although the case is limited to the 11th Circuit (Fla, Ala, Ga) it could potentially have impact elsewhere. The concept of limited powers to define and apply Atkins could possibly be extended beyond just the burden of proof (e.g., one could argue bright line cutoff scores, SEM, and courts claiming to know the types of behaviors the define the AB prong of the Dx--Briseno AB standards in Texas). 

Clearly this case warrants close monitoring.

I have added the case to the ICDP Court Decisions blogroll with a link to the decision.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Research brief 6-20-10: "Cause" lawyering, individualism, and the death penalty

Kaplan, P. J. (2010). Forgetting the future Cause lawyering and the work of California capital trial defenders. Theoretical Criminology, 14(2), 211-235. (click here to view)
This article aims to push the boundaries of definitions of capital cause lawyering to include a more potentially radical ‘cause’ that takes on one key ideological underpinning of state killing: individualism. This article studies whether and how capital trial lawyers take up a ‘radical’ cause by challenging individualism. To the extent that they oppose state killing and illuminate social inequality, the defenders studied in this project engage in something beyond the parameters of their particular trials, and thus fall partially within current definitions of cause lawyering. However, considering that they are unaware of, avoid, or suppress subversive arguments within the expansive discursive space afforded by penalty phase proceedings, they may be ‘forgetting the future’ precisely so that their clients may avoid a death sentence. Rather, defenders construct narratives that portray a liminal conceptualization of the influence of social forces on human free will, a concept known in the defense bar as ‘diminished autonomy’.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, June 18, 2010

Book: Voices of the death penalty debate

At link below

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Saturday, June 12, 2010

iPost: J Am Acad Psychiatry Law Table of Contents for 1 June 2010; Vol. 38, No. 2

A new issue of Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online is available online:

1 June 2010; Vol. 38, No. 2

The below Table of Contents is available online at:

Forensic Psychiatry in Canada: A Journey on the Road to Specialty
Dominique Bourget and Gary Chaimowitz
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 158-162

Veterans and the Justice System: The Next Forensic Frontier
Debra A. Pinals
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 163-167

Stephen Bates Billick, MD: A Journey from the Heartland to the Big City
Eraka Bath
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 168-173

False Confessions, Expert Testimony, and Admissibility
Clarence Watson, Kenneth J. Weiss, and Claire Pouncey
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 174-186

Commentary: Overcoming Judicial Preferences for Person- Versus Situation-Based Analyses of Interrogation-Induced Confessions
Deborah Davis and Richard A. Leo
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 187-194

Humiliation: Its Nature and Consequences
Walter J. Torres and Raymond M. Bergner
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 195-204

Commentary: Till We Have Faces—On Humiliation
Gwen Adshead
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 205-208

Commentary: Is the Paradigm for Humiliation Sufficiently Complex?
Victor A. Altshul
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 209-211

Mortality Rates of Males Who Commit Parricide or Other Violent Offense Against a Parent
Anu Liettu, Liisa Mikkola, Hannu Säävälä, Pirkko Räsänen, Matti Joukamaa, and Helinä Hakko
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 212-220

Commentary: Addressing Suicidality in the Treatment of Parricidal Offenders
Marc Hillbrand
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 221-222

The Effect of a Forensic Fellowship Program on General Psychiatry Residents' In-training Examination Outcomes
Stacy M. McBain, Jeremy A. Hinton, Carol R. Thrush, D. Keith Williams, and J. Benjamin Guise
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 223-228

Maternal and Paternal Filicides: A Retrospective Review of Filicides in Finland
Anne Kauppi, Kirsti Kumpulainen, Kari Karkola, Tuija Vanamo, and Juhani Merikanto
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 229-238

Ritual and Signature in Serial Sexual Homicide
Louis B. Schlesinger, Martin Kassen, V. Blair Mesa, and Anthony J. Pinizzotto
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 239-246

Whose DNA Is It Anyway? European Court, Junk DNA, and the Problem With Prediction
Sameer P. Sarkar and Gwen Adshead
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 247-250

Hoarding, Hermitage, and the Law: Why We Love the Collyer Brothers
Kenneth J. Weiss
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 251-257

The Slayer Statute and Insanity
Jennifer Piel and Gregory B. Leong
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 258-262

The "Pseudocommando" Mass Murderer: Part II, The Language of Revenge
James L. Knoll, IV
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 263-272

Expert Witness Testimony in Conservatorship Proceedings
Jerrold A. Adkins and J. Richard Ciccone
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 273-275

Disclosure of Mental Health Records
Timothy Beal and Joshua C. W. Jones
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 275-278

Mental Health Considerations for Asylum
Christopher Daley and John R. Chamberlain
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 278-280

Competence to Waive Miranda Rights
Paul R. S. Burton and John R. Chamberlain
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 280-282

Legal Rights for Members of the Armed Forces
Annemarie Casesa and D. Clay Kelly
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 282-284

Death Penalty and Mentally Ill Defendants
Franklin J. Bordenave and D. Clay Kelly
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 284-286

Knowing Moral and Legal Wrong in an Insanity Defense
Elaine Martin and Kenneth J. Weiss
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 286-288

A Handbook for Correctional Psychologists: Guidance for the Prison Practitioner
Babatunde Adetunji
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 289-290

Women Who Perpetrate Relationship Violence: Moving Beyond Political Correctness
Susan Hatters Friedman
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 290-291

Relocation Issues in Child Custody Cases
Bernardo J. Mora
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2010;38 291-292

This message was sent to

Unsubscribe from or edit your subscription for this service.
Or by mail: Customer Service * 1454 Page Mill Road * Palo Alto, CA 94304 * U.S.A.

Copyright © 2010 by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

Friday, June 11, 2010

iPost: International law conference 2011

iPost: Call for Papers: special issue on “Diversion from the Criminal Justice System.”

> Call for Papers: Criminal Justice & Behavior
> Criminal Justice & Behavior announces a forthcoming special issue on
> "Diversion from the Criminal Justice System." This special issue is
> being edited by David DeMatteo, JD, PhD, and Kirk Heilbrun, PhD.
> Manuscripts that address a wide variety of topics related to
> diversion from the criminal justice system will be considered for
> this special issue. Of particular interest are manuscripts that
> address diversion of adult and juvenile offenders based on mental
> health disorders or substance abuse, and interventions that can be
> targeted at various points in the criminal justice process (ranging
> from initial contact with law enforcement to re-entry into the
> community following release from incarceration). Both empirical and
> theoretical manuscripts are welcome.
> The deadline for submitting manuscripts is December 15, 2010.
> Manuscripts should be 25-35 double-spaced typewritten pages,
> including graphs, charts, figures, tables, and references. All
> manuscripts should adhere to the guidelines contained in the
> Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th
> edition, 2001). Abstracts should not exceed 120 words, and three to
> seven keywords should be included. Manuscripts should be submitted
> electronically in Word format to Dave DeMatteo ( or
> Kirk Heilbrun ( Inquiries regarding manuscripts
> for this special issue can be addressed to either special issue
> editor.

Thursday, June 10, 2010

iPost: Jose Briseno wins new punishment trial

Briseno gets ne punishment trial. Info from Texas Standdown project


> The CCA ruling in Ex Parte Briseno is at:
> - - - - -
> 06/09/2010 | via Dallas Morning News
> Condemned Texas man wins new punishment trial
> By MICHAEL GRACZYK | Associated Press
> The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday threw out the death
> sentence
> of a man condemned for fatally shooting a South Texas sheriff nearly
> 20 years
> ago.
> The court ruled jurors who decided Jose Briseno should be put to
> death didn't
> have enough information in their instructions from the trial judge
> to make
> their decision. At the time of Briseno's 1992 trial, the rules
> regarding
> instructions for capital murder juries were evolving to comply with
> U.S.
> Supreme Court decisions.
> His appeals attorneys said the jury didn't receive proper
> instructions about
> how to consider mitigating evidence of Briseno's unstable family,
> troubled
> background, limited intellectual ability and poverty.
> The case now returns to the court in Laredo where Briseno was
> convicted for a
> new punishment trial.
> Briseno, now 53, was convicted of gunning down Dimmit County Sheriff
> Ben "Doc"
> Murray in January 1991 at the 68-year-old sheriff's home in Carizzo
> Springs,
> about 140 miles southwest of San Antonio.
> Briseno got within a few days of his scheduled execution last April
> when the
> Court of Criminal Appeals stopped the punishment to look at the
> questions
> raised about the jury instructions.
> Briseno's attorney, Richard Burr, did not immediately respond to a
> message
> from The Associated Press.
> Briseno originally was scheduled to die in January 2009, but a state
> judge
> reset the date to April so a disabled friend from England could make
> arrangements to come to Texas and visit him on death row.
> In 2002, Burr argued Briseno was mentally impaired and ineligible
> for the
> death penalty under Supreme Court rules and won a reprieve for
> Briseno less
> than four hours before he could have been put to death.
> Murray, who had been sheriff for 20 years, had arrested Briseno in
> the past
> and authorities speculated the killing could have been out of
> revenge. At the
> time of the slaying, Briseno had been on parole almost a year.
> A visitor to the sheriff's home found his body the morning of Jan.
> 6, 1991.
> Murray had been shot with his own gun and a butcher knife was left
> buried in
> his chest. By that evening, Briseno and a companion, Albert
> Gonzales, were
> under arrest.
> Blood samples taken from the carpet at the sheriff's house matched
> Briseno's
> blood, and the sheriff's blood was found on Briseno's clothing.
> After his arrest, Briseno and two other inmates broke out of the
> Zavala County
> Jail in Crystal City and remained at large for a couple of days.
> Gonzales, who lived next door to the sheriff, received a life prison
> term.
> Briseno got the death penalty.
> / / / / /
> Steve Hall
> 512.879.1675 (o)
> 512.627.3011 (c)
> Skype: shall78711
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "StandDown Texas Project" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to