Search

In a 25-year Australian cohort of men and women found Not Guilty by reason of Mental Illness (NGMI forensic patients; N = 477), we aimed to: establish the sociodemographic, clinical and forensic characteristics of the sample, comparing men and women; to establish rates of post-release reoffending, including for men and women separately; and to test associations between individual characteristics and post-release re-offending in the full sample. Post-release re-offending was considered in terms of officially-recorded charges, proven offenses, violent offenses, and any offending within the first 12 months of release. Women (13.8%) were found to differ significantly from men on a number of key characteristics but, although women had a higher rate of proven offending in the early post-release period, sex was not a predictor of post-release offending overall. Post-release re-offending rates were low (6.3% committed proven offenses in the first 12 months following release) and the only independent predictor of re-offending was a clinically-recorded diagnosis of co-morbid personality disorder (i.e. co-morbid with a primary psychosis diagnosis). The differences identified between male and female NGMI forensic patients, including the differences in re-offending in the early post-release period, have implications for the development of forensic services and interventions, in both inpatient and community settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study identified factors that predicted which of 713 clinically documented incidents of aggression—threats to kill, assault, or sexual assault—committed by 404 forensic psychiatric patients were linked to court findings of guilt. Individuals had, on average, 1.7 aggressive incidents and were found guilty of an average of 0.3 offenses against persons during the study period. Aggressive incidents were mostly assaults, followed by uttering death threats, and sexual assaults. The victims of aggressive incidents were mainly other patients or staff, but some incidents involved family members or friends (16%) and strangers (14%). Most of the aggressive incidents (84%) did not lead to findings of guilt. Incidents of aggression linked to court findings were significantly associated with province; personality disorder; fewer prior aggressive incidents; and incidents involving strangers compared to staff or co-patients or to family or friends. These findings have implications for research in terms of understanding how criminal records underestimate histories of aggression. These findings also point to the need for the development of more consistent policies and procedures for responding to patient aggression, including when it is necessary or productive to report to police. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an overview of the criminal justice system's folk-psychological understanding of people and behavior. The attempt of this paper is to explore some of the complex literature focused on the criminal justice system in order to provide a concise account of its foundational beliefs about responsibility and the human condition. Although the effectiveness of the criminal justice system is a topic of contention, many scholars and legal actors agree that this institution is in part designed to impact people's decisions and behavior. The law's understanding of how people think and on what basis they act is thus of fundamental importance. This paper explores three areas where the law is willing to lessen prescription of criminal responsibility or finds a person not guilty despite their having engaged in apparently wrongful conduct. First, the law's default understanding that people are rational agents is tempered by its acknowledgment of the human condition. Second, the law recognizes that some people who engage in wrongful conduct fall outside the ambit of criminal law. Third, the law embraces a more nuanced view of blame when determining appropriate punishment, taking into account the impact that an unfair social structure has on individual responsibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]