RESUMEN
Mentally ill and emotionally disturbed offenders comprise a significant component of those whose criminal conduct has swept them into the criminal justice system, including a subset who are tried and convicted of capital murder. The present study employs the population of capital cases advanced to penalty phase in the state of North Carolina (1990-2009) to examine whether presentation to the jury of the statutory mitigators of extreme mental and emotional disturbance and capacity impaired, and specific mental illness diagnoses, often referred to as mental disorders, at the sentencing phase mitigate against a sentence of death. Mental disorders included mood disorders, psychotic disorders, anxiety disorders, brain disorders, multiple mental illness diagnoses, learning disabilities, and personality disorders. Results from these 835 cases indicate that with the exception of one, the diagnosis of a learning disability, the capital jury's acceptance of various mental health conditions does not effectively mitigate against a capital sentence. In addition, jury rejection of a diagnosis of mental illness or the two mental health statutory mitigators, capacity impaired and extreme emotional disturbance, as a mitigating factor has a counter-mitigating effect in that it significantly increases the odds of a death penalty recommendation by about 85-200%.
Asunto(s)
Pena de Muerte , Aplicación de la Ley , Enfermos Mentales , Criminales , Homicidio , Humanos , Masculino , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , Enfermos Mentales/psicología , North Carolina , PsiquiatríaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A large body of research has examined the relationship between victimization and future offending, with results suggesting that crime victims are at higher risk of future criminal behavior-known as the victim-offender overlap. Prior studies have primarily examined the relationship between general victimization (e.g., violent victimization, sexual abuse, and more) and general offending (e.g., violence, sexual offending, and drug use), and focused on adult populations. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the present study is to expand on prior literature by examining if specific forms of childhood victimization increase the risk of specific and analogous forms of offending among delinquent youth. METHOD: Based upon a population of 64,329 high-risk youth offenders in Florida, this study evaluates the specificity of the overlap among youth who were physically abused, sexually abused, or witnessed illegal substance use at home during childhood to determine if these forms of victimization increased the risk of violence, sexual offending, and drug use, respectively, when assessed in multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Results provide considerable support for specificity in the victim-offender overlap, as hypothesized. Specifically, experiencing physical abuse (ORâ¯=â¯1.55, pâ¯<â¯.001), sexual abuse (ORâ¯=â¯3.58, pâ¯<â¯.001) and witnessing household substance abuse (ORâ¯=â¯1.66, pâ¯<â¯.001) in childhood each significantly and substantially increased the risk of analogous criminal behavior in adolescence, even when controlling for other risk factors and forms of victimization. CONCLUSION: This study provided novel evidence for specificity in the victim-offender overlap, even after controlling for confounding variables. Practical implications for early intervention and crime prevention are discussed, as well as implications for future research. Highlighting the importance of specificity in the victimization and adverse childhood experience (ACE) paradigms.