Switch to ADA Accessible Website
Orlando Criminal Lawyer
call for a free
consultation

New Study Finds That Psychological Tests Used in Criminal Trials May Be “Junk Science”

shutterstock_1046520793

A new study revealed that unreliable IQ and psychological tests are leading to junk forensic science being used as evidence in criminal trials, and this is ultimately influencing juries and judges to make life-and-death decisions for criminal defendants. Specifically, one-third of psychological tests used in recent court cases were never reviewed in prominent manuals and, of those that were reviewed, only 40 percent were considered to be favorable. In addition, almost 25 percent were considered to be unreliable.

In other words, not only is there a huge variability in the psychological tools being used in US courts, but junk science is not being filtered out as it should be, and legal challenges to the validity of these tests are only occurring in less than three percent of all cases. While judges and attorneys rely on experts in the field to ensure that any tests used to present evidence are reliable, based on the study, it is apparent that this is not occurring.

How Are Psychological Tests Used To Convict Defendants?

These psychological tests or assessments are used in cases to find potentially underlying psychological disorders or other factors that may be associated with certain medical conditions and/or psychological deficits. Assessments are then used to help understand the health status of individuals who are in the legal process in order to assist juries, etc. by providing them with scientific data gathered from the psychological evaluations.

Previous Reports Highlight the Same Problem – Why Hasn’t It Been Addressed?

This new research is highly relevant because the fates of a number of criminal defendants are determined based upon tests and assessments like these. However, it is by no means the first report that has found a strong link between questionable forensic science and wrongful convictions: In 2009, the National Research Council released a report that went into extensive detail concerning testimony that was based on faulty forensic science analyses. According to the report, this testimony could have contributed to a number of wrongful convictions. While the courts are supposed to filter out junk science based what is dictated in the federal rules of evidence, unfortunately they are not doing so.

The study found that the most commonly used psychological test is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, followed by the Rorschach test, which has long been controversial and considered to be both ambiguous and subjective.

If You Have Been Accused of a Crime, It Is Imperative That You Work with A Defense Attorney Who Knows Forensic Science

The Baez Law Firm specializes in the use of forensic science in criminal defense. We do not accept what the police or prosecutors present when it comes to evidence because we know that serious mistakes can cost lives. Let our Orlando forensic science lawyers help you. Contact our office today to schedule a free consultation.

 

Resource:

researchgate.net/publication/321918050_Traditional_Psychological_Tests_Usage_in_Forensic_Assessment

kmov.com/courtroom-psychology-tests-may-be-unreliable-study-finds/article_17abac54-d3a0-5dd2-8c9e-c55bc2829475.html

ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228091.pdf

https://www.baezlawfirm.com/jailed-for-bad-science/

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Miami

Miami Office

1200 Brickell Avenue #1410
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-999-5100
Fax: 305-999-5111
Orlando

Orlando Office

23 South Osceola Avenue
Orlando, FL 32801
Office: 407-705-2626
Fax: 407-705-2625

Email Us

Fields Marked * Are required

Captcha Image

DISCLAIMER: Completing and submitting this form or otherwise merely contacting The Baez Law Firm or any individual at the firm will not establish an attorney/client relationship. Our firm cannot represent you until we determine that there would be no conflict of interest and that we are otherwise able to accept representation of your case. Please do not send any information or documents until a formal attorney/client relationship has been established through an interview with an attorney and you have been given authorization in the form of an engagement letter with The Baez Law Firm. Any information or documents sent via this form or otherwise prior to your receipt of an engagement letter will not be treated as confidences, secrets, or protected information of any nature. Submitting information regarding your potential case will not bar The Baez Law Firm from representing or continuing to represent a person or entity whose interest are adverse to your in condition with your case.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
MileMark Media - Practice Growth Solutions

© 2015 - 2020 Baez Law Firm. All rights reserved.
This law firm website and legal marketing are managed by MileMark Media.

Contact Form Tab Contact Form Tab