Assessment Disclosure

[clinedavis]

I recently completed an assessment on a client who had admitted to his offense when questioned by police officers. The client signed a disclosure, after he read it and it was verbally explained to him. During the clinical interview, he admitted to his offense but informed me that his attorney had told him to not give any details of his offense. I asked no more questions about the offense at this point. Since that time, the client has recanted as has the accuser.

I recently visited with the prosecutor as to the above case as he had ask me to testify about the client's admission. During the conversation, he suggested that although much of the Miranda intent was in the disclosure, it would be helpful if I changed the verbage to more directly reflect the legal Miranda warning. I can see that it might make my assessments more user friendly for the courts, but I am not an officer of the court and am a bit worried that such language may place me in that position in the mind of the client. Does anyone have any experience with this or suggestions about it?

[PMH]

What language did the prosecutor want you to add?

PMH

[docb]

If the man admitted to the offense to you, then if he signed a no-confidentialilty agreement, then I believe you can put that in your report. If he told you that he admiltted to the offense to the police and then signed it but did not tell you that he committed the offense but only that he signed a disclosure with the police then you have nothing to put in your report because he did not admit anything to you. On Federal cases on Pre-trial I can not talk about their offense and I can not ask any details of the alledged crime. I am not allowed to even put anything pertaining to their crimes in my evaluation to pre-trial. I do the same with my probation cases that have not been adjudicated. Pre-trial and pre-sentencing is different from post conviction. You are right, you are not an officer of the court and even though you may know he did it if he refused to talk about the case you cannot change any wording on your assessement to satisfy the prosecuter

[carlosllopez]

I find myself in the position of the PO requesting a psychosexual evaluation prior to adjudication. It seems that I heard somewhere that it is an awkward position in which to be. I also understand that it is unethical but could not find it in the Code of Ethics for ATSA. It is difficult to assess when the question of guilt is in question. What would one be assessing? If the client admitted prior to adjudication, he would be incriminating himself.

Thoughts please.

[fjgall]

I didn't see that in ATSA, either.

Certainly you can't indicate one way or the other whether the man is innocent or guilty.

You can try to describe his personality style, sexual interests, etc.

You might want to find out from the PO the purpose of the eval, and then decide if you can ethically perform the eval.

[mftman]

That's one reason why I clinically will not do a pre-conviction risk assessment. I am currently working on my PhD in Criminal Justice (though am a treatment professional) and my dissertation topic, if approved, will be "Interrogation Tactics Used in Forced False Confessions." It will be a qualitative study with subjects who confessed to either murder or a sexual offense that resulted in a prison sentence of 20+ years. If someone admits, we must be aware of the circumstances of their admission. Kern County, California (see the documentary Witch Hunt) is an excellent example of "creative" tactics to get children to accuse, as well.

On the other hand, if the perpetrator is guilty, could the accuser have been coerced into recanting?

These are questions for criminal investigation, not clinicians.

[philco326]

Wondering how many of you do either formal (i.e. court, probation) or semi-formal evaluations of offenders, say for attorneys or institutions? If so, I'd be very interested in hearing what instruments you're using, i.e. personality assessments, static risk, dynamic risk, AASI, P-Graph?

[clinedavis]

In response to the above comments and questions: The language the prosecuter wants me to put in involves telling the client that he has a right to consult an attorney and that anything included in the report may be used against him in a court of law. My current disclosure informs the client that anything he says may be put into the report and that the report will be given to the probation officer who referred him for evaluation. I do not ask them if they committed the offense. I tell them the charge on the offense report and whether the offense report contains an admission on their part. Then I ask them if they wish to give their version of the events. When I write the report, I put in what is in the offense report, labeled as such, and what the client says, labeled as such. I do not make any judgements as to guilt or innocence - - just give information.