Characteristics of Criminal Defendants Referred for Psychiatric Evaluation

TLDR: The socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of a sample of criminal defendants who were referred to the Court Liaison Service for psychiatric screening data has been extracted from the records of the court Liaison service and the psychiatric reports prepared for the courts as discussed by the authors.

Abstract: This paper describes the socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of a sample of criminal defendants who were referred to the Court Liaison Service for psychiatric screening Data has been extracted from the records of the Court Liaison Service and the psychiatric reports prepared for the courts Most defendants were male, Pakeha, and facing serious charges They had high rates of both previous psychiatric contact and criminal conviction Defendants who received the usual correctional sanctions are compared with those who were admitted to a psychiatric hospital as an outcome of their court appearance More defendants who received correctional sanctions were referred because of concerns about dangerousness and they had high rates of depression Most defendants who were hospitalised had diagnoses of schizophrenia or bipolar affective disorder There are four ways in which criminal defendants can be compulsorily hospitalised due to a mental disorder in New Zealand Each of these options has distinctly different theoretical justifications, historical origins and developments over time They functionally lead however to the same outcome for the defendant who becomes compulsorily confined in a psychiatric hospital The admission criteria do not directly equate with any diagnostic classification The legal standard for insanity, based on the McNaughten rules, requires the presence of `natural imbecility or disease of the mind' that impacts on the person's understanding of the nature or quality of the act or that it was morally wrong (section 23(2) Crimes Act, 1961) While there are definitional issues, disability in New Zealand equates with fitness to plead in other jurisdictions It necessitates mental disorder that interferes with the defendant's ability to plead, to understand the court proceedings or to communicate with counsel (section 108 Criminal Justice Act, 1985) A defendant convicted of a criminal offence can be sentenced to a psychiatric hospital if the court is satisfied that the person is mentally disordered and that detention in a hospital is necessary for the safety of the public or is in the defendant's own interests (section 118 Criminal Justice Act, 1985) When a defendant faces charges that are not serious, there may be negotiation which results in the police prosecutor agreeing to drop charges and proceedings being commenced under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act, 1992 International studies of the characteristics of criminal defendants who receive a psychiatric disposition have often employed samples of either insanity acquittees or those found unfit to plea or both There are differences in legal standards and in the consequences of these findings across jurisdictions which makes comparisons difficult Approximately 10% of American criminal defendants who receive a psychiatric disposition are female, (Callahan, Steadman, McGreevy, & Robbins, 1991; Zonana, Bartel, Wells, Buchanan, & Getz, 1990) Most studies have found that these defendants are older than other criminal defendants and prison populations (Jeffrey, Pasewark, & Bieber, 1988; Pasewark, Jeffrey, & Bieber, 1987; Rice & Harris, 1990) Generally no association has been found between the race of the defendant and an adjudication of insanity (Callahan et al, 1991; Pasewark et al, 1987); however a meta-analytic review found that members of minority ethnic groups were more likely to be judged incompetent (Nicholson & Kugler, 1991) Marital status does not discriminate between insanity acquittees and comparison groups (Pasewark et al, 1987) Most acquittees are unemployed (Boehnert, 1988; Jeffrey et al, 1988; Pasewark et al, 1987) and employment is less frequent than in comparison groups (Rice & Harris, 1990) Over 70% of defendants who receive a psychiatric disposition have been previously arrested (Jeffrey et al, 1988; Pasewark et al, 1987) Some researchers have found that many insanity acquittees faced charges for minor nonviolent and nuisance offences (Boehnert 1988; Golding, Eaves, & Kowaz, 1989) …