Integrating base rate data in violence risk assessments at capital sentencing

Prediction of violence in capital sentencing has been controversial. In the absence of a scientific basis for risk assessment, mental health professionals offering opinions in the capital sentencing context are prone to errors. Actuarial or group statistical data, known as base rates, have proven far superior to other methods for reducing predictive errors in many contexts, including risk assessment. Actuarial follow-up data on violent recidivism of capital murderers in prison and post release have been compiled and analyzed to demonstrate available base rates for use by mental health experts conducting risk assessments pertaining to capital sentencing. This paper also reviews various methods for individualizing the application of base rates to specific cases. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The guilty mind and criminal sentencing: integrating legal and empirical inquiry as illustrated by capital sentencing

We articulate an interpretation of mens rea that is broader than the traditional special sense but narrower than the traditional general sense. Mens rea in this intermediate sense addresses the guilty mind required by the sentencing criteria for specific criminal sentences for particular offenses. We advance an analytic structure for the integration of legal and empirical inquiry regarding standards of culpability that establish eligibility for capital punishment under contemporary United States legal doctrine. This structure addresses legal standards of culpability directly as well as indirectly in the form of evolving standards of decency. The general form of this analysis should be applicable more generally to sentencing provisions that address culpability as a sentencing consideration for other criminal sentences.     

Capital punishment in Missouri: Examining the issue of racial disparity

Guided discretion statutes were designed to control arbitrariness and discrimination in capital sentencing. Using data from Supplemental Homicide Reports and Trial Judge Reports, this article examines the issue of racial disparity in Missouri's capital punishment process from 1977 through 1991. Findings from the three decision points examined suggest racial bias against the killers of whites, particularly if the offender is black, and a concomitant devaluation of black victims. The strongest effects noted are in the prosecutor's decision to charge homicide offenders with capital murder and to proceed to penalty trial in convicted capital murder cases. While the effects are not necessarily limited to the least aggravated categories, the effects of race are strongest when prosecutors and jurors are freed from the seriousness of the cases to consider other factors. The racial disparities are also apparent in mid-range cases up until the sentencing stage. However, disparities occurring earlier in the process are not rectified during sentencing. In fact, in the least aggravated cases, racial disparities are magnified at the sentencing stage.     

Mark D. Cunningham: award for distinguished contributions to research in public policy

Presents a citation for Mark D. Cunningham, who received the Award for Distinguished Contributions to Research in Public Policy "for his highly distinguished contributions to research on death-sentenced inmates, capital sentencing determinations, and law." Accompanying the citation are a brief profile and a selected bibliography, as well as Cunningham's award address, entitled Dangerousness and Death: A Nexus in Search of Science and Reason. ((c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).     

Dangerousness and death: a nexus in search of science and reason

An assertion that a capital offender will engage in future acts of criminal violence is a factor in determining "death worthiness" in many jurisdictions of the United States. The legislative conception and court affirmation of this issue as a capital consideration were products of the parole policy and prison capability of an earlier era as well as of the limitations of risk assessment methodology and findings at that time. The intuitive assumptions that support assertions of future dangerousness as a death penalty issue have been rendered irrelevant by changing prison conditions and parole policies or have been refuted by current findings. This raises important questions for a reasoned public policy in capital sentencing. ((c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).     

The Role of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge in Capital Murder Sentencing1

This paper identifies rational orderliness and moral appropriateness as 2 norms that the United States Constitution requires for sentencing in capital murder trials. The courts convey these norms directly to jurors through jury instructions in the penalty phase of capital murder trials. To follow the instructions, jurors require accurate declarative knowledge (rules of law) and procedural knowledge (processes required to execute the rules) of state and federal sentencing law. Undergraduate mock jurors showed low accuracy for both types of knowledge after reviewing and listening to pattern jury instructions. Participants failed to offset aggravating factors with mitigating circumstances as the Missouri Approved Jury Instructions direct. The less knowledge that participants mastered about mitigation, the more certain they were of invoking the death penalty.     

THE RESCUE DEFENCE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Many political philosophers today think of justice as fundamentally about fairness, while those who defend capital punishment typically hold that justice is fundamentally about desert. In this paper I show that justice as fairness calls for capital punishment because the continued existence of murderers increases unfairness between themselves and their victims, increasing the harm to murdered persons. Rescuing murdered persons from increasing harm is prima facie morally required, and so capital punishment is a prima facie duty of society and sentencing judges. 1     

The Angry Juror: Sentencing Decisions in First‐Degree Murder

A great deal of research in legal decision making has overlooked the influence of affect on the decision‐making process. The present study measured the fluctuation of emotions across five time points of a capital trial and tested the overall relationship between changes in emotion and sentencing decisions. The results showed that across all participants, anger initially increased and then decreased during the course of a capital punishment trial. Most importantly, the more individual mock jurors' anger increased during any stage of the trial, the more likely they were to assign a death sentence. Furthermore, when jurors' anger increased, they rated mitigating factors presented by the defense as weaker and the weaker mitigation mediated the relationship between change in anger and sentencing. The paper ends with a discussion of theoretical explanations and policy implications. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of the psychopathy checklist – revised in capital cases: Mock jurors' responses to the label of psychopathy

Despite mixed empirical evidence regarding the ability of the Psychopathy Checklist – Revised (PCL‐R) to predict violence among incarcerated inmates, it continues to be used to address such questions, even in the context of capital cases. The purpose of this study was to examine if the PCL‐R has a prejudicial effect on mock jury members during the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial. Results indicated that participants were more likely to sentence the defendant to death when the defendant exhibited a high likelihood to commit future violence, whether or not the diagnostic label “psychopath” was present. Interestingly, when asked to rate the defendant's likelihood for future violence and murder, the defendant who was a high risk for future violence and not labeled a psychopath received the highest rating. These results suggest an absence of juror bias as it pertains to the label “psychopath” when sentencing a defendant in a capital murder case. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An examination of the effects of mental disorders as mitigating factors on capital sentencing outcomes

Mentally ill and emotionally disturbed offenders comprise a significant component of those whose criminal conduct has swept them into the criminal justice system, including a subset who are tried and convicted of capital murder. The present study employs the population of capital cases advanced to penalty phase in the state of North Carolina (1990–2009) to examine whether presentation to the jury of the statutory mitigators of extreme mental and emotional disturbance and capacity impaired, and specific mental illness diagnoses, often referred to as mental disorders, at the sentencing phase mitigate against a sentence of death. Mental disorders included mood disorders, psychotic disorders, anxiety disorders, brain disorders, multiple mental illness diagnoses, learning disabilities, and personality disorders. Results from these 835 cases indicate that with the exception of one, the diagnosis of a learning disability, the capital jury's acceptance of various mental health conditions does not effectively mitigate against a capital sentence. In addition, jury rejection of a diagnosis of mental illness or the two mental health statutory mitigators, capacity impaired and extreme emotional disturbance, as a mitigating factor has a counter-mitigating effect in that it significantly increases the odds of a death penalty recommendation by about 85–200%.     

Clinical evaluations for transfer of juveniles to criminal court: current practices and future research

Completing clinical evaluations of juveniles considered for transfer to criminal court requires specialized expertise. However, there is little empirical foundation upon which they can be based. Within each of the three major evaluation domains (amenability to treatment, risk for future violence, and sophistication/maturity), we ask the following questions: a) Can forensic examiners properly assess this area, and if so using what tools?; b) How can social science research clarify the transfer evaluation, particularly as it is impacted by systems issues?; and c) How should the evaluation be structured? In doing so, we review clinical suggestions for completing these evaluations and identify pertinent research directions. A number of general issues specific to these evaluations are also discussed. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Nature,nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic–environment interaction,future dangerousness,and deliberation affect sentencing decisions

Research has shown that the low‐activity MAOA genotype in conjunction with a history of childhood maltreatment increases the likelihood of violent behaviors. This genetic–environment (G × E) interaction has been introduced as mitigation during the sentencing phase of capital trials, yet there is scant data on its effectiveness. This study addressed that issue. In a factorial design that varied mitigating evidence offered by the defense [environmental (i.e., childhood maltreatment), genetic, G × E, or none] and the likelihood of the defendant's future dangerousness (low or high), 600 mock jurors read sentencing phase evidence in a capital murder trial, rendered individual verdicts, and half deliberated as members of a jury to decide a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The G × E evidence had little mitigating effect on sentencing preferences: participants who received the G × E evidence were no less likely to sentence the defendant to death than those who received evidence of childhood maltreatment or a control group that received neither genetic nor maltreatment evidence. Participants with evidence of a G × E interaction were more likely to sentence the defendant to death when there was a high risk of future dangerousness than when there was a low risk. Sentencing preferences were more lenient after deliberation than before. We discuss limitations and future directions.     

Jury Panel Member Perceptions of Interpersonal‐Affective Traits of Psychopathy Predict Support for Execution in a Capital Murder Trial Simulation

Recent research with college undergraduate mock jurors suggests that how psychopathic they perceive a criminal defendant to be is a powerful predictor of whether they will support a death verdict in simulated capital murder trials. Perceived affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy are especially predictive of support for capital punishment, with perceived remorselessness explaining a disproportionate amount of variance in these attitudes. The present study attempted to extend these findings with a more representative sample of community members called for jury duty (N = 304). Jurors reviewed a case vignette based on an actual capital murder trial, provided sentencing verdicts, and rated the defendant on several characteristics historically associated with the construct of psychopathy. Consistent with prior findings, remorselessness predicted death verdicts, as did the affective and interpersonal features of psychopathy – though the latter effect was more pronounced among jurors who were Caucasian and/or who described their political beliefs as moderate rather than conservative or liberal. Results are discussed in terms of the potentially stigmatizing effects of psychopathy evidence in capital cases. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sex offenders, sentencing laws and pharmaceutical treatment: a prescription for failure

The phenomenon of adults who have sexual interests involving children as partners, or pedophiles, is considered among the most sociopathological of human conditions. Considerable literature is devoted to issues and problems associated with or related to pedophilia, including prevalence, etiology, treatment, and outcome studies. The sexual victimization of children, based upon data gathered from a number of sources, suggests an intractable problem that is national in scope. Recent manifestations of society's efforts to deal with the sexual victimization of children include the enactment of criminal sentencing laws that mandate the treatment of offenders with certain pharmaceutical agents, such as medroxy-progesterone acetate ("MPA"). Because sentencing laws as a rule vary widely from state to state, there is considerable variation as to who is subject to MPA treatment laws, and how such laws-including specific provisions, such as clinical criteria, if any, required for treatment; type and period of treatment plans; informed consent; etc-are implemented. Most important, these sentencing laws may have remarkably little relation to what is widely considered effective treatment for pedophilia disorders. We examine in detail the most recent sentencing laws pertaining to treatment of persons who have been convicted of sex offenses involving children as victims. Our critique may offer insight and suggestions as to how such sentencing laws can be more suitably tailored to the treatment needs of persons with pedophilia disorders.     

Father Knows Best: Parishes, Priests, and American Catholic Parishioners' Attitudes Toward Capital Punishment

Public opinion has important implications for capital punishment in the United States. Such opinion formation involves moral judgments irreducible to processing information on the administration of capital punishment or sentencing alternatives. Religious communities play a crucial role in resolving such moral dilemmas and giving meaning to available information. The Catholic Church strongly opposes capital punishment and strives to instruct lay Catholics on this issue. Accordingly, church attendance is associated with less support of the death penalty among Catholics but not among non-Catholics in the general population. Politically and socially conservative Catholic parishioners are more supportive of such punishment, while more religious parishioners report less such support. Parish priests significantly influence death penalty attitudes, in particular among more spiritual parishioners. Black Catholics are more supportive of the death penalty than their non-Catholic counterparts, in part because of a convergence in death penalty attitudes between blacks and whites in predominantly black parishes.     

Treating Multitraumatized,Socially Marginalized Children: Results of a Naturalistic Treatment Outcome Study

Although early-onset, repeated trauma is relatively common in socially marginalized populations and related to numerous negative outcomes, most empirically validated interventions are not especially well tailored to meet the complex and individualized needs of child and adolescent trauma survivors in such contexts. Integrative treatment of complex trauma (ITCT) was developed as a specialized treatment that is empirically informed, culturally sensitive, extendable beyond the short term, and customized to the specific social and psychological issues of each child. This article examines the potential effectiveness of ITCT in assisting 151 traumatized children living in an economically deprived environment. Results indicate significant reductions in anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress, anger, dissociation, and sexual concerns as a function of time in treatment.     

Guidelines are not enough: The need for written sentencing opinions

Guideline sentencing systems, including the new federal guidelines, have not settled on a clear conception of when and how a trial judge should explain sentences. Indeterminate sentencing systems did not have a tradition of written sentencing decisions and recent sentencing reforms do not focus on the trial judge's role. This article suggests the many advantages of written sentencing opinions. Initial experience under the federal sentencing guidelines bolsters the conclusion that written sentencing opinions in appropriate cases—including both sentences “within” guidelines and guideline “departures”—are the next step in the evolving law of sentencing and the best way to recognize trial judges as an essential engine of principled change.     

Apolitical courts? Rape sentencing in Montana

This analysis examines dockets of the state courts of Montana for the years 1987-1989 in rape cases to determine whether sentencing decisions are significantly related to three political variables: the percentage of women in county executive office as a measure of a relevant judicial constituency, the extent to which the county in which a court is located is Democratic, and whether the judge who enters a decision was appointed or elected. The analysis suggests that two legally relevant facts—the crime rate and multiple charges against a defendant—are significantly related to outcome. Political factors do not appear to influence state court sentencing decisions in rape cases since: (1) sentencing decisions in rape cases are not ‘major’, publicized issues; (2) the selection of state court judges (appointed and elected) is nonpartisan; and (3) interest groups were not involved in rape sentencing cases.