Monthly Archives: November 2010

Preventing Juvenile Crime Before it Happens

Posted on by
Reply

Although many would argue for justification in sentencing, it’s tragic to see a child lose his life by a court ruling. But rather that spending so much time arguing about whether a child should be tried as an adult or sent to a juvenile program, maybe the best solution would be to prevent the argument all together. The first years of life solidify many habits, criminal behavior included, so it would seem beneficial to fund programs to bring aid to children before they even become violent.

As a matter of fact, these programs do exist and they may be more effective than the programs that intervene after a child commits delinquent behavior. The features that make these programs most effective are early intervention and comprehensiveness. According to Alina Samisky, two programs that embody these features are home visitation programs and Head Start. At first these programs determine children most prone to violence based on factors such as low intelligence, low family income, or fetal substance exposure, then intervention occur even before adolescence. Head Start in its history has enrolled 22 million children and the program has already been widely successful. The program provides children with an education, health services, parental involvement, and in general social services. The program positively impacts children’s intelligence, academic readiness, social behavior, etc. and effectively prevents delinquency. The delinquency prevention seems to be more as an extension of overall life improvement of these programs rather than special targeting of preventing delinquency.

I think that the best treatment for preventing crime has been overlooked when we focus on rehabilitation for juvenile cases. Ultimately children’s actions depend on society’s influence. Look at Lionel Tate, who killed his sister from imitating professional wrestlers. He’s described to be bright, with normal IQ, yet had an eight year history of criminal behavior by the time he was twelve. With the proper treatment he may not have committed any of these crimes. Certainly better influences can be bestowed upon these children, especially the ones who are most prone, and these programs provide these children with that opportunity. Not only does it diminish delinquency, but even more importantly it gives them a better chance at overall success in life.

The Battered Woman Defense

Posted on by
Reply

A recent article on CNN Justice describes the resentencing of Susan Wright, otherwise known as the Blue-Eyed Butcher, on charges of first-degree murder. Wright was found guilty by a Harris County jury for stabbing her husband over 200 times after seducing him and tying him to a bed. Currently serving a 25 year sentence, her case was recently sent to an appellate court where the charges have been upheld, however her sentence has been set aside after finding that her attorneys failed to serve her in the penalty phase of her case. The primary point of contention was with the defense attorney’s failure to capitalize on Wright’s claims of domestic abuse which she claims caused her to have Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) – an physical and psychological condition resulting from persistent physical, emotional, or sexual abuse from another person, most commonly a spouse. BWS has been identified as a subcategory of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the DSMV-IV but has not been universally acknowledged in either the legal or medical communities and has in fact been rejected by Congress after investigation into the condition.

This case is an example of how psychological conditions – even those which are not acknowledged in the DSMV – can mitigate severity of punishment. With new information introduced to the case, namely the testimony of a psychiatrist, a BWS expert, and an ex-girlfriend who had once pressed assault charges on the victim, a second jury must now determine Wright’s punishment, which could range from probation to life in prison. Although it seems intuitive that this new testimony will lessen the severity of Wright’s sentence, arguments against the use of a similar condition (Rape Trauma Syndrome) could hinder the effectiveness of the Battered Woman Defense, as it is also called. These arguments focus on “the lack of clear definition and scientific reliability” and the worry that BWS oversimplifies victim response. Acknowledging the slippery slope, one could imagine a scenario in which anyone who can prove themselves a victim of abuse could employ a similar defense. An extreme case of this would be if a man who was spanked as a child were to kill his mother and then claim that his actions were justifiable and in some way a self-defense response.

In the court room, testimony from BWS experts most commonly aims to support a defense of self-defense, however it could also support claims of provocation, diminished responsibility or insanity. The Battered Woman Defense does not necessarily address the three criteria of the self-defense law (that a proportionate amount of force be used, that the defendant be faced with immediate provocation, and that the defendant be in immediate danger), so it has thus far served to mitigate the sentencing of women like Wright. I think that the details of this particular case argue against the self-defense plea, particularly the fact that Wright premeditatedly lured her husband into a sexual scenario and stabbed him not during an attack and not just once, but 200 times. It seems as though Wright acted more out of revenge than actual self-defense, and assault victims who act out of revenge are not entitled to the self-defense law. It will be interesting to see how the defense attorneys handle this case and how the legal system evolves to include the Battered Woman Defense.

Female Sex Offenders – Are they different?

Posted on by
Reply

We often find ourselves profiling sex offenders and pedophiles as males, but I was curious about the prevalence of female sex offenders and if there had been any studies conducted to study them. For one thing, there were definitely not as many studies on female sex offenders as males, and this was partly due to the fact that females make up only 4-5% of the sex offender population in a study across North America, the UK, and Australia and New Zealand. Within the U.S., 6% of adult women are arrested for sex offenses and only 1% are arrested for forcible rape.


In an interesting study conducted in Sweden, researchers found that female sex offenders seem to have more mental illnesses and drug addiction problems than male sex offenders. The study compared 93 convicted female sex offenders with 13,000 women arrested for non-sex crimes as well as to 20,000 women in the normal population. The results showed that there was “no difference in incidences of mental illness and drug abuse between these women and women who had committed other kinds of crime”. The mental illnesses included various psychoses and schizophrenia and were associated with stays in psychiatric hospitals. Many of these females also had drug/alcohol addictions. As an example, just a couple weeks ago in Houston, a woman on the Texas sex offender registry for prostituting a minor was arrested again for trying to prostitute her own body. Previously, she had also been convicted of possessing cocaine.

There have been various studies conducted on male sex offenders (specifically pedophiles) that have found abnormalities in the amygdala or hippocampus, (1,2) but I did not find any fMRI studies on female sex offenders. Studies have also shown that recidivism rates are lower for female sex offenders than for males. However, this could be due to the fact that sex offenses by females are less reported to begin with, or that prison time actually affected them.
In general, I think it would be interesting to conduct more studies on female sex offenders and to better establish neurological and behavioral differences between male and female sex offenders. Since the current data suggests that female sex offenders are more likely to have mental illnesses and drug issues, new studies confirming this finding could necessitate a change in rehabilitative approaches for female sex offenders.

Does Prison Work? Questions about the effectiveness of the United Kingdom’s proposed system.

Posted on by
Reply

The United Kingdom has help to reignite the questions about alternative forms of punishment and/or rehabilitation to prison. In the U.K., roughly 60% of those convicted each year are only in prison for less than 12 months, because they are there as a result of small offenses, and drug offenses. Of those who leave prison, roughly 60% of them are convicted again within a year of their release. With a system that such high rates of recidivism it is no wonder the U.K. is struggling to do something to correct it. Justice Secretary, Ken Clarke announced that he thinks there must be a better way to approach the issue as he announced that the inmates should work a 40 hour week getting paid minimum wage and give a part of their wages to pay for their stay at the prison and some of it to the victim’s charities.

The underlying reason for this rapid change in policy was the new spending budget which proposes cutting the Justice Department’s budget by around 25% in the next 5 years. In order to reach those dramatic cuts, dramatic action must be taken in reducing the recidivism of inmates and making sure they leave jail to become productive members of society. Part of the problem with this is that the short term offenders are serving sentences which are just long enough to dramatically effect their life (job, family, etc…), but in many cases, the sentences are not effective at bringing forth a change in behavior. The idea of giving prisoners a 40 hour work week has its disadvantages. According to Mark Johnson, it would be impossible to be able to monitor inmates, many of whom suffer from mental health and addiction problems, during a 40 hour work week if they were able to do any meaningful kind of work other than sorting recycled goods. This brings forth another option brought forward by Ken Clarke, which was that of payment by results; a system where private outfits would be paid in accordance with the reduction of recidivism.

Though all of these reforms may be promising in their own way, I think that a better idea would be to use the tools we have gained with cognitive and behavioral neuroscience to help find new ways of rehabilitating these inmates to keep them from falling back into the cycle of crime. In a BBC report interviewing former inmates and those involved in rehabilitation; it seemed almost unanimous that they believed prisoners should be given some kind of responsibilities and work while they are in prison, but many of the rehabilitation groups argued for the importance of giving the inmates “real” jobs. I agree with this sentiment; I think that by giving inmates both the education and training to be successful in the outside world must come with some real life application of those skills, which could be done through a targeted job. These “rehabilitation jobs” should be customized based on the inmates skills. In fact, in doing so the system might even be able to use the inmates own weaknesses (reason they committed the crime) as a reference point to what skills they should help the individual develop to prevent them from going back to that path. Overall, I think this is a landmark opportunity for the U.K. Justice System to try out more comprehensive rehabilitation strategies, and their success (or the lack thereof) should be followed closely by Judicial Systems around the world, many of whom have the same issues.

Solution: antipsychotic drugs for juvenile rehabilitation?

Posted on by
Reply

A year long investigation by Youth Today shows that many juvenile detention halls are prescribing potent psychiatric medication meant for schizophrenic and bipolar patients to juvenile offenders that have not been diagnosed with either disorders. Critics believe that this nondiscriminatory use is a mere replacement of the old-fashioned use of physical restraints to numb and quiet the juveniles. Contrarily supporters advocate the medications’ sedative functions. Adolescent psychologist LeAdelle Phelps who has been involved in the juvenile justice system for decades states, “By reducing aggression by having calming, soothing effects, it makes [the youths] more malleable”.

There are also the potent side effects in question. The 16 participating states (the other 34 states provided no answers when queried) reported that their juvenile halls mostly administer the second generation of anti-psychotic drugs, or the atypicals, which have been marketed to be safer than first generation drugs. However, Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chairman of the psychiatry department at Columbia University challenges and believes the contentions that the new drugs are superior are “greatly exaggerated”. These atypicals still possess significant side effects such as drowsiness, nausea, weight gain, involuntary body movements and diabetes, which are neglected by the juvenile halls’ nondiscriminatory prescriptions of the medications.

If a mental health court is to be implemented for juveniles, then the proper approach should be providing these juvenile hall residents the appropriate diagnoses and subsequently the respective counseling and/or medication treatments from child psychiatrists. This solution may loop back to being the cause of the situation, however, as many juvenile halls lack a sufficient ratio of child psychiatrists to residents. Many institutions then substitute psychiatric counseling with the cheaper alternative—psychiatric medication, leading to the over-prescription of psychiatric medications to juvenile residents without the corresponding diagnoses.

Specifically from the perspective of a risk and benefit analysis, if these atypical drugs are not addressing a juvenile’s problems, they would have little to no beneficial contributions to the juvenile’s rehabilitation process. These drugs would nonetheless pose potent health risks that may in turn interfere with and become detrimental to the overall treatment.

Legal maneuverings continue in case of California death row inmate

Posted on by
Reply

A CNN article, published September 27, reports an attempted stay of execution for a man who raped and murdered a young woman in 1982. The article summed up the brutality of the attack and the man’s actions after, in which he called the girl’s parents and the police. His phone calls informed of the body’s location, but sounded more like bragging than a confession or an apology. His defense presented psychiatric evidence into the case, claiming his actions were a product of “sexual maladjustment and dysfunction.”

This case stands hallmark to the reluctance of many to see neuroscience take a bigger role in criminal justice. The act’s excessive violence and lack of remorse would set any reader against this man. Moreover, the presentation of psychiatric evidence in the defense of this kind of case discredits the use of neural evaluations in the courtroom. While neuroscience offers a powerful tool in evaluating and rehabilitating criminals, its perceived use as a “get out of jail free card,” built up by cases like this, certainly delays the implementation of neuroscience’s true potential in criminal law.

Further Reading:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/27/california.execution/index.html

Juvenile Justice in Harris County: Judge John F. Phillips and the Harris County Juvenile Mental Health Court

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, November 29, Harris County Judge John F. Phillips will be a guest speaker at the Initiative’s Seminar Series.  He will discuss the state of juvenile justice in Harris County and will talk about the formation and function of his unique court:

“In 2008, in a proactive effort to avoid criminalization of youth whose delinquent conduct is significantly impacted by a serious mental illness, the 314th District Court Judge John Phillips provided the leadership for the development and implementation of Harris County’s first Juvenile Mental Health Court. . . .  This innovative problem solving court utilizes a therapeutic approach and emphasizes rehabilitation over punishment. The ultimate goal is to ensure public safety while decreasing repeat offenses by facilitating coordinated mental health interventions.”
About the Mental Health Court

For more information about Judge Phillips or the Harris County Juvenile Mental Health Court, please see the court’s website or this summary.  Or, read other posts about juvenile justice.

Juvenile mental health court from Judge John F. Phillips on Vimeo.

Death of a four year old by a thirteen year old

Posted on by
Reply

At the age of 13, Eric Smith was convicted of murdering a 4 year old child, Derrick. Not only did the crime not fit the criminal (Smith has redheaded looks and freckled face with glasses who looks completely innocuous) but the horrific scene and murder method was also at odds with Smith. According to the authorities, Smith lured Derrick into a field and battered him with a large and small rock until Derrick was dead. Moreover, he sodomized Derrick’s body with a stick and sprinkled Derrick’s cool-aid and squished his banana at the scene of the crime as well. Interestingly enough, Smith’s blood tests and hormone tests along with brain scans came out to be normal. However, the defense psychiatrist, Dr. Stephen Herman, diagnosed him with intermittent explosive disorder and concluded that “Something happened to his brain, but we can’t measure it.” However, the most disturbing aspect of this tragic incident is that Smith presented no emotional cues throughout his trial. He had a blank face throughout and did not express any remorse at all as Ted Smith recorded “I don’t ever recall him saying he was sorry that he killed the boy.” The defense attorney argues that Smith, now around 30, should be released because he is no more disturbed and has gone through extensive rehabilitation therapies and procedures.

Although, I understand that Smith has gone through many psychiatric evaluations and has received extensive time in jail, I believe that it is still not a good idea to relieve him from incarceration. Firstly, he committed a heinous crime of a 4 year old and did not feel any remorse for it. Secondly, in addition to his normal results of blood tests etc, he had a sense of right and wrong when he planned this act as he was sensible enough to lure Derrick into the field before killing him. Moreover, there is this disturbing aspect of the case in which Smith himself admits that he ‘enjoyed’ or at least got a rush during and from this act stating “at the moment, it did, yes.” When asked why he did it, Smith said, “Because instead of me being hurt, I was hurting someone else.”

I sympathize with the past record of Smith being bullied at school and having no friends, but it is still not normal for a 13 year old to have the courage and guts to be this violent to a 4 year old just to ‘let the anger out.’ Moreover, his actions and emotionless nature seems to indicate that he might be a psychopath. Although, not affirmed in Smith’s case, psychopaths are also known to start their series of crime in early stages of life and tend to develop or have no emotional responses: A case similar to that of Smiths. Although, his psychiatrist diagnosed him with some other disorder, he still admitted that “after the episodic rage, the child may appear to be normal.” Therefore as observed in his case, if free, any other unfortunate incident in Smiths case can trigger another rage episode leading to more tragic incidences. Therefore, I believe that people like Smith (which seem to have a serious psychological disorder) need to remain under observance (does not have to be maximum security prison) and under constant therapy (psychiatric and psychological) because, as yet, there is no affirmation and guarantee that when out in society, they will not repeat their heinous crimes again (and even hide them better this time).

Youth Justice And Neuroscience in the UK, A Duel-Use Delimma

Posted on by
Reply

A recently published article in The British Journal of Criminology written by Charlotte Walsh at the University of Leicester School of Law discusses the role of neuroscience and the increasing comprehension of the human brain on youth justice policy in the United Kingdom. The study intends to investigate the potential of studies to be undergone in the United Kingdom which would parallel those done in the United States many years ago that provided evidence in favor of raising the age of criminal responsibility. Walsh cites other studies that show that the adolescent brain is underdeveloped in comparison to that of an adult and that adolescents process information differently (mainly through the amygdala) than adults (mainly through the prefrontal cortex) which gives adults far greater impulse control. The important distinction made in the study is the difference between judgment and cognition, with adolescents lacking complete control of the former. Walsh then discusses the differences between the US and UK systems of youth justice. The UK has undergone a slow “adult-eration”, the treatment of youth criminals in the same manner as adults. Walsh makes an argument based on the proposed Prison Reform Trust; “a pertinent question is whether this jury ought to be made up of young people to fulfill the expectation that defendants be tried by a jury of their peers. If youths are deemed old enough to be criminally responsible, then it seems at least arguable that they are responsible enough to serve on a jury.”

Walsh also discusses the potential ethical pitfalls of the uses of neuroscience in a court of law and a need to proceed in creating new neuroscience based policy with caution. According to Walsh; “neuroscience can be used in ways that both contribute to human flourishing, along with potentially diminishing it. In science, this is a well recognized quandary, referred to as the dual-use dilemma.” Walsh articulates his philosophy quite well in a few excerpts from the article; “Employing neuro-scientific findings does not mean relying exclusively on that domain of knowledge. The concept of consilience, the unity of knowledge emphasizes the need for an interdisciplinary approach. It is all too ‘tempting to draw great truth from brightly colored pictures of brain activity. ‘Crime’, ‘conduct disorders’—even neuro-images and their interpretation—are all human constructions, so this is far more complicated, far more ethically messy, than an ‘objective’ exercise in prediction.” Walsh finishes the article by applying this philosophy to the neuroscience of parenting and risk. A great deal of evidence supports the lifelong importance of the first three years of human brain development. Walsh discusses the potential consequences of these findings based on the “colorful images” including a proposal for the government to remove children from their mother’s care for these years.

This article gave an overview of the beginnings of the neuro-law movement in the United Kingdom. It is interesting to read about neuro-law from the perspective of the United Kingdom and comparing it to the United States. The author has also discussed many ethical dilemmas and “slippery slope” issues about the use of neuroscience in a court of law. Specifically Walsh warns against the use of neuroscience to act as a silver bullet for parenthood issues and predicting future criminal behavior as the consequences could be dire. This article is an excellent summary of the position that the United Kingdom takes on the use of neuroscience in court along with an argument for a raise in the “age of responsibility”.

The Barefoot Bandit: A Non-Violent Juvenile Offender

Posted on by
Reply

When considering the field of juvenile justice, the first case that came to my mind was that of now 19-year-old Colton Harris-Moore, dubbed by the media as the “Barefoot Bandit.” His case is particularly interesting because it interplays with several aspects of neuroscience. In searching for the most sensational angle, the media has thoroughly interviewed Colton’s mother, Pam Kohler, about his upbringing; her commentary has made it clear that Colton’s childhood was marked by instability, loss, substance abuse, and unconventional parenting methods. Though Malcom Gladwell argues that criminal profiling is little more than a party trick, the media appears to have jumped on the chance to retrospectively link his behavior to the circumstances surrounding his upbringing, including the absence of his biological father, the death of his step-father, a violent relationship with his mother, and early encounters with the criminal justice system for theft and other non-violent crimes.

What strikes me as interesting about the claim that his behavior could have been foreseen given the details of his youth is the fact that though he is a repeat offender, his crimes have all been non-violent. Typically, we expect that children brought up in violence will grow up to commit violent crimes, however Harris-Moore proves that this is not the case. Furthermore, authorities have released statements confirming the opinions of Colton’s acquaintances and relatives, claiming that “this is not a guy who will turn to violence” and that he “is not a violent kid”. Further research on my part produced Harris-Moore’s forensic psychological evaluation, which provides the details of his background in shocking detail. The evaluation also reveals that not only has Colton “not hurt other people, but he has never been a user of any drugs or alcohol…he understands that both his parents have had severe substance abuse problems, and he wishes to avoid complicating his life further with drugs or alcohol.” This attitude and history seems contrary to what popular culture has convinced us is characteristic of abused or neglected children like Harris-Moore.

The case of the Barefoot Bandit proves that there is no recipe for creating a juvenile offender. A dysfunctional childhood marked by violence and substance abuse will not necessarily produce a violent offender, or even an offender at all. In trying to determine where exactly Harris-Moore deviates from the stereotype, one finds that such a dissection is impossible. As would be expected of a child with similar upbringing, Harris-Moore had been diagnosed with several mental disorders by the age of sixteen including Dysthymic Disorder, Parent-Child Relational Problem, Intermittent Explosive Disorder, Conduct Disorder, and ADHD. He had been inconsistently prescribed antidepressants, mood stabilizers, stimulants and anti-psychotics. Even his psychiatric evaluation notes that he is “not a typical antisocial youth” because he did not exhibit aggression or a “glib or superficial” disposition. It is important for both professionals and jurors to understand that individuals diagnosed with a certain mental disorder still behave as individuals, and do not necessarily exhibit the typical behaviors associated with said condition. This is necessary if sentencing is to be effective at the individual level. As noted in his psychiatric evaluation, Harris-Moore’s particular nature is such that he “could be hardened into an uncaring and unhopeful young man if compelled to spend lengthy periods in JRA institutions…what he needs most is to associate with healthier peers, teachers, and other adults, and get to work and school.” It is unfortunate that now, as a 19-year-old, such methods of rehabilitation are not being considered, for the media has created such a frenzy over his case that police departments from around the country seek retribution.