Abstract
Peering into the criminal psyche has long interested scientists and psychologists, as the mental stability of criminals, predominantly violent criminals, is oftentimes questioned and studied in order to efficiently understand the reasoning behind their behavior. I am not an exception, the mentality of criminals has long interested me as well, and after researching I have realized that a majority of mental illness is not taken into account in a court of law. This had led me to question how mental illness and psychology can be a larger factor in deciding sentencing. Over 17% of those who enter the justice system are plagued by mental illness, yet in order to be declared mentally unstable one must jump through a variety of hoops such as; time, competency to stand trial, the mental status at the time of the crime, and future predictions. It is often very difficult for defendants to fit every single category, even though when they were studied, the rate of phobias, anxiety, somatic complaints, psychosis, depression, paranoid thoughts, aggression, obsession, compulsion and interpersonal sensitivity in criminals was far higher than in normal people. The mental stability of criminals should be taken more into account and needs to be a larger factor in sentencing. More thorough psychological examinations should be conducted at the time of the crime rather than later on during trial, as mental stability can change over time. For example, if a person commits a series of murders due to a psychotic break but is not psychologically examined until months later, results can be anywhere leading from inconclusive to completely incorrect, as mental stability as well as a sense of warped reality can metamorphose over time. I hope to eventually correct this discrepancy.
Peering into the criminal psyche has long interested scientists and psychologists, as the mental stability of criminals, predominantly violent criminals, is oftentimes questioned and studied in order to efficiently understand the reasoning behind their behavior. I am not an exception, the mentality of criminals has long interested me as well, and after researching I have realized that a majority of mental illness is not taken into account in a court of law. This had led me to question how mental illness and psychology can be a larger factor in deciding sentencing. Over 17% of those who enter the justice system are plagued by mental illness, yet in order to be declared mentally unstable one must jump through a variety of hoops such as; time, competency to stand trial, the mental status at the time of the crime, and future predictions. It is often very difficult for defendants to fit every single category, even though when they were studied, the rate of phobias, anxiety, somatic complaints, psychosis, depression, paranoid thoughts, aggression, obsession, compulsion and interpersonal sensitivity in criminals was far higher than in normal people. The mental stability of criminals should be taken more into account and needs to be a larger factor in sentencing. More thorough psychological examinations should be conducted at the time of the crime rather than later on during trial, as mental stability can change over time. For example, if a person commits a series of murders due to a psychotic break but is not psychologically examined until months later, results can be anywhere leading from inconclusive to completely incorrect, as mental stability as well as a sense of warped reality can metamorphose over time. I hope to eventually correct this discrepancy.