Puppet Masters
Brain scans and genetic tests are becoming a common feature of courtroom battles, as biological evidence is increasingly used to explain a person's criminal behaviour. For example, last year an Italian woman convicted of murdering her sister had her lifetime sentence reduced to 20 years on the basis of brain and genetic tests, which provided biological explanations for her aggressive behaviour.
But does the inclusion of such evidence affect the sentencing of psychopaths - people with a disorder currently thought to be untreatable? Any evidence could act as a double-edged sword, says James Tabery at the University of Utah. A so-called biomechanism to explain psychopathic behaviour could be used to argue that a person is less culpable for their actions, reducing their sentence. On the other hand, the defendant could be seen as more likely to reoffend and receive a longer sentence.
Testing the sword
To find out "which way the sword was going to cut", Tabery, together with psychologist Lisa Aspinwall and law professor Teneille Brown, also at Utah, sent out a survey to 181 US judges based in a number of different states.
Each judge was asked to sentence a convicted criminal diagnosed as a psychopath. The team's fictional character was based on Stephen Mobley, who robbed and then killed a Domino's pizza store manager in 1991. Mobley went on to brag about the crime, and even got the word "Domino" tattooed on his back. Psychologists claimed that his behaviour and lack of remorse was psychopathic and untreatable. At the time, Mobley's request to submit a genetic-based defence for his behaviour was denied, says Tabery. "The Georgia State Supreme Court said [genetic evidence] wouldn't have made any difference," he says. "He was sentenced to death."
In Tabery's fictional case, a man was found guilty of the similar crime of aggravated battery, although the victim was not killed but left with permanent brain damage. The criminal was diagnosed as a psychopath by a psychiatrist. Half of the judges were given additional evidence from a second psychiatrist, who said that the man's behaviour was the result of a genetic mutation that caused a structural abnormality in his brain. Half of each group of judges received the diagnosis as a form of defence, pleading the man's lack of control and culpability over his actions. The other judges saw the diagnosis as part of a prosecution which argued that the man was likely to reoffend.
Shorter sentences
Without a diagnosis, the judges surveyed said they would have given the man a sentence of about nine years. Once he had been diagnosed as an untreatable psychopath, however, the average sentence jumped to 14 years. When judges were presented with biological evidence of the genetic mutation, this sentence was lowered to around 13 years, regardless of whether the evidence was presented by the prosecution or defence.
"We saw both sides of the double-edged sword in play," says Tabery. "The addition of a biological mechanism slightly reduces the sentence compared to just the diagnosis of psychopathy, but it's still significantly higher than what judges said their average sentences are for aggravated battery."
Stephen Morse, professor of law and psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, says that the issue of free will in responsibility for one's actions should be "beside the point" in a court room. "Having free will or not having it is not part of any legal doctrine, and needs never be proven or disproven."
But if biological evidence can swing sentences, should all psychopaths be given the option to include brain scans and genetic tests in their defence? Or should the use of such evidence be ruled out entirely? "Different states and different judges vary in how they process this information," says Tabery.
Morse thinks this variation is a real problem in the criminal justice system. "It's usually up to the judge to decide what factors to balance at sentence, how they should be weighed and what evidence to consider, and that results in very varied sentencing," he says. "I think there should be less discretion involved in sentencing, although judges hate the idea."
Journal reference: Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1219569
Comment: Biological evidence of psychopathy in a violent criminal - or even a white collar criminal - should make permanent incarceration mandatory, NOT reduce sentences. Of course they can't help being psychopaths; they can't stop it either, that's the problem.
Reader Comments
"And the fact is: All crime is caused by this condition."
So then the teenager with a few grams of pot is a psychopath?
The mother stealing food for her starving children is a psychopath?
As Ark pointed out with Swerdlow... that word "all" pretty much condemns what ever follows it, when used in the sense of a sweeping generality.
Great article.
I totally agree that these poor psychopaths (who don't choose to have this affliction) should be removed from the rest of the world and given their own country.
Even if it means removing the indiginous population in order to do so.
On the other hand, we've already tried that and they only ended up stockpiling nuclear weapons and waging war on their neighbours.
Society does not know how to deal with crime when it is caused by this condition.
And the fact is: All crime is caused by this condition.
Psychiatry, for its part, would like to increase its access to people to play around with. One approach was the "insanity" defense. Another is to just take over prisons. In jurisdictions where prisons have slipped into private hands, this has, for all intents and purposes, been accomplished.
If you take a psychopath and send him to a prison being run by a private business, he might well be able to obtain access to communication lines that would allow him to continue his "work" from prison.
The handling for psychopathy is not "prison" per se. The handling is actual honest physical separation from whatever power structure was once under its control, AND the reform of that power structure so another criminal can't just step in and take over.
If this could actually be accomplished, conditions could be improved with surprising rapidity. This principle has been successfully tested at the scale of a mid-sized company. And a similar approach has been used to reduce crime in targeted communities.