Using a Model to Guide Data Gathering, Interpretation, and Communication in Capital Mitigation Evaluations

Abstract

ABSTRACT The use of a model can have a direct impact on several areas of forensic mental health assessment, and is important in gathering and interpreting data, reasoning about the results and conclusions, and communicating the results of such an assessment. The following report and accompanying discussion illustrates the application of a forensic model in the context of a defense-initiated capital mitigation evaluation under Pennsylvania State law. The first step in employing a model was to identify the relevant legal standard, which required the forensic clinician to assess character traits, contextual circumstances, extreme mental or emotional disturbance, and mental and cognitive deficits that might have had a direct impact on the defendant's ability to conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the alleged offense. In the second part of the model, these clinical characteristics were related to the tasks and functional abilities that are part of the relevant legal question. Finally, using the third step of the model, the forensic clinician assesses the strength of the causal connection between the existence of mental and cognitive deficits and the functional abilities related to the relevant legal question. In addition to improving the overall quality and accuracy of the evaluation, the use of this type of model is consistent with the guidelines and substantive criteria for capital mitigation articulated by the United States Supreme Court.