Most commonly, in criminal cases these psychologists play big roles in course a trial takes and its outcome. Law enforcement uses psychologists for many things. Sometimes they are used to evaluate officers who have been through a traumatic experience on the job such as killing someone or being shot/ injured on the job. They are also called in on occasion to watch integrations and give deceives insight on the suspect’s mannerisms and mental status. When law enforcement is dealing with issues regarding children, child psychologists are often called in to observe the child and speak with them regarding the situation.
Once the behavioral profile is done, the profiler can then compare this to other criminals or mental patients with the same basic characteristics. It is generally very difficult to get professional hands-on experience on how to be a profiler. Police have been able to catch a wide array of people using profilers, including serial killers. Once criminals have been taken into custody, profilers can learn even more about the criminal mind and can find possible motives, verify motives, and/or assess the defendant's state of mind. The police psychologist does more hands-on work with officers and victims as opposed to criminals.
For example a psychologist who works in jails would be studying forensic facts and dealing with psychopathy on a daily basis, unlike a psychologist who could be studying psychotherapy and dealing with children’s behaviours. Each is an expert in their own fields, it is up to the lawyers to decide which to use. Some psychologists can have developmental and social training but can be turned down to be an expert witness because they were missing clinical training. Clinical psychology would be the requirement that the expert would need in order to be considered. In the case of Mohan, he made a list of criteria that would be used for the choosing of the expert witness’s reliability.
The tutorial discussion this week was essentially discussing how the system operates and some of the flaws within the system such as false convictions which come about through human error or in extreme cases racial bias (Alberto F. Alesina, Eliana La Ferrara, 2011). There was also discussion about the members of the jury and if they are qualified or competent to decide he guilt or innocence of an individual based on their opinions and perceptions of the trial. My view on the criminal justice system is that overall the system is adequately effective in terms of providing a fair trial for the accused and well suited to punish individuals based on viable evidence and the judgment of experienced judges and magistrates. These issues reflect the interests of the JSB173 unit because the unit focuses on a fair trial through either the
It is not considered jury tampering because the prosecution and defense attorneys have the right to know the credibility of the person that would be deciding the fate of the defendant. Why or why not? The only way that I would see it being jury tampering is if after the jurors are chosen, someone starts threatening or trying to coerce the witness to not testify at the trial. Lawyers can also exercise a challenge for cause claiming the juror could not be
2. Forensic Psychology is the application of the science and profession of psychology to questions and issues relating to law and the legal system. * American Academy of Forensic Psychology 3. Forensic psychology is the intersection between psychology and the criminal justice system. It involves understanding criminal law in the relevant jurisdictions in order to be able to interact appropriately with judges, attorneys and other legal professionals.
This is also a system of check and balance that hopefully will contribute to a fair trial. Peremptory challenges are challenges that are allowed by the court to the attorneys which give them the power to eliminate a juror for no reason at all with only two exceptions race or gender. Opening Statements Each lawyer outlines the main points of the case to the jury, putting the best interpretation on the case. Both in voir dire and in opening statements, lawyers also try to make good personal impressions on jurors. (Zalman,
First you have the Prosecution. The responsibility of the prosecution is to prove that without a shadow of a doubt that the defendant committed the crime. Im sure there are times that the prosecution does not think the defendant is not guilty but it is there moral right to keep the trial going and prove their case. It has got to be difficult for the prosecution to know that because of the case they have built against a person could decide the rest of their life. Lets get to the Defense.
Lacey Smith November 25th, 2014 CJ 233: Forensic Psychology Professor Araujo Unit 2 Assignment “Psychologists long defined their role essentially as that of a scientist engaged in research or in the applied work of psychometrist; later the role of therapist assumed prominence.” (Lyons, n.d). Within recent years, psychologists have increasingly assumed new professional roles within institutional settings such as the criminal justice field. The criminal justice field has sparked the most interest with psychology due to the need for psychological intervention along with the multitude of ethical questions that lead to a debate within the psychology profession. However, with the interests and need for having psychologists working within the criminal justice field this has created a variety of different roles in which these professionals will have and also a change in which creates a working relationship between the law and psychology. The criminal justice system consists of many different professionals who all have different duties and responsibilities.
I (1) In an ideal world of forensic science, human psychology, bias and subjectivity would not be issues of concern for analysts investigating crimes. As things are, however, the presence of the human element in forensic analysis can often introduce certain impediments to the integrity of an investigation, as well as raise questions as to the reliability of certain laboratory findings pertaining to crime cases as they are presented in the court of law. The “Context Effect” article discusses several such hindering psychological effects. The observer/context effect is one such perceptive error described as the context of a given situation having an effect on a person’s judgment in looking at the case. The observer effect ties in closely with context bias – in which an observer’s preconceived notions about a case will have an effect on its conclusion – and with the concept of expectancy.