Judicial Decision Making About Forensic Mental Health Evidence

Richard E. Redding & Daniel C. Murrie, Judicial Decision Making About Forensic Mental Health Evidence, in Forensic Psychology: Emerging Topics and Expanding Roles 683 (Alan M. Goldstein ed., 2007).

25 Pages Posted: 22 Oct 2010 Last revised: 29 May 2014

Richard E. Redding

Chapman University, Office of the Provost

Daniel C. Murrie

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Date Written: October 21, 2010

Abstract

Judges play a central role in decision making in the justice system. This chapter reviews the extant empirical research on judicial decision making in criminal, juvenile, and civil cases. We discuss judges’ decision making about forensic mental health evidence introduced in these cases, judicial receptivity to various kinds of evidence, and their understanding of clinical and scientific evidence as well as the ways they make rulings about such evidence. We focus on decision making at the trial court level, in those arenas that are most relevant to the forensic mental health practitioner (psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker) who is called on to provide testimony to the courts.

Keywords: Judges, Decision Making, Forensic Evidence, Mental Health Evidence, Mental Health Experts

Suggested Citation

Redding, Richard E. and Murrie, Daniel C., Judicial Decision Making About Forensic Mental Health Evidence (October 21, 2010). Richard E. Redding & Daniel C. Murrie, Judicial Decision Making About Forensic Mental Health Evidence, in Forensic Psychology: Emerging Topics and Expanding Roles 683 (Alan M. Goldstein ed., 2007). . Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695561

Richard E. Redding (Contact Author)

Chapman University, Office of the Provost ( email )

One University Drive
Orange, CA 92866-1099
United States
714-628-2688 (Phone)
714-628-2564 (Fax)

Daniel C. Murrie

affiliation not provided to SSRN ( email )

Paper statistics

Downloads
163
Rank
150,217
Abstract Views
1,241