{"title":"涉及精神错乱辩护的法医证言和陪审团指示","authors":"J. Cohn, Jennifer Karlin","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"dominant cause of mental injury. The court also concluded that the Commission did not err by affirming the Board’s denial of a SIME. Additionally, the court ruled that the Board’s exclusion of parts ofMs.Magestro’s testimony was not prejudicial, particularly because Ms. Magestro conceded she was unqualified to offer diagnoses.Ms. Patterson was permitted to present other opinions by qualified experts, yet the Board assigned more weight to the opposing expert.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"442 - 444"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forensic Practitioner Testimony and Jury Instructions Involving Insanity Defense\",\"authors\":\"J. Cohn, Jennifer Karlin\",\"doi\":\"10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"dominant cause of mental injury. The court also concluded that the Commission did not err by affirming the Board’s denial of a SIME. Additionally, the court ruled that the Board’s exclusion of parts ofMs.Magestro’s testimony was not prejudicial, particularly because Ms. Magestro conceded she was unqualified to offer diagnoses.Ms. Patterson was permitted to present other opinions by qualified experts, yet the Board assigned more weight to the opposing expert.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"442 - 444\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Forensic Practitioner Testimony and Jury Instructions Involving Insanity Defense
dominant cause of mental injury. The court also concluded that the Commission did not err by affirming the Board’s denial of a SIME. Additionally, the court ruled that the Board’s exclusion of parts ofMs.Magestro’s testimony was not prejudicial, particularly because Ms. Magestro conceded she was unqualified to offer diagnoses.Ms. Patterson was permitted to present other opinions by qualified experts, yet the Board assigned more weight to the opposing expert.
期刊介绍:
The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL, pronounced "apple") is an organization of psychiatrists dedicated to excellence in practice, teaching, and research in forensic psychiatry. Founded in 1969, AAPL currently has more than 1,500 members in North America and around the world.