"The Fusion of the Court and Mental
Health"
COMPOSITION by: CICI HUANG ✦ UNITED STATES
Introduction
The year is 2021, and a 16-year-old girl runs out of a courtroom crying. A few months ago, she was stripped of her dignity and self-worth by an 18-year-old named Drew Clinton at a party; and now justice all together, has been stripped away as her rapist will receive only a fraction of the sentence he deserved¹. Why? Because the presiding judge simply decided that it was the victim's fault when she chose to wear a more exposing outfit to that party. Unfortunately, this injustice is a shared reality that victims experience all across the country.
The Central MN Sexual Assault Center reports that only 6% of all convicted rapists ever spend a day in jail--meaning that 15 out of 16 perpetrators walks free². Despite increased awareness around sexually motivated crimes and their psychological impacts, the American legal system has been slow to adopt meaningful change. A significant knowledge gap exists between the older, more conservative generation serving in the court room, and the ever evolving society who wishes to destigmatize talks of sexual assault. This gap is detrimental towards achieving just verdicts when the judges and jurors who are responsible for finalizing a trial find it hard to grasp the full repercussions of sexually motivated crimes. To explore ways to close this gap and restore justice to the American Criminal Justice System, this paper will examine how mental health in relation to the psychological effects of sexual assault victims can be increasingly promoted through mandatory training sessions for current and future judges and lawyers, a selection process for a more competent jury panel in complex cases, and incorporating a new court role specialized in aiding the judges and jurors by inputting mental health knowledge.
II.
The increase of mental health evidence, or evidence based on the mental state of someone within the trial, in the United States Criminal Justice System reflects modern society’s de-stigmatization of mental health care and awareness; Accordingly, cases involving sexual assault especially benefit from this shift. In the American Criminal Justice System, evidence is essential in making any credible claims in court. Though most evidence presented in court are tangible and easily corroborative--such as pictures and witness testimony,intangible mental health evidence and psychological evaluations have long been permitted when they meet standards of admissibility. Evidence admissibility, as defined by Cornell Law School, requires that evidence must be of some relevance, unprejudicial , and unprivileged to be presented in court for consideration. Unless mental evidence fails to meet these requirements, it can be used if it aligns with admissibility criterias.
Even so, mental health professionals acknowledge that such evidence can be confusing and difficult to navigate. Dr. Corina Freitas, a forensic psychiatrist and expert in the field, explains how “you will often see misunderstandings in terms of what diagnosis are and looks like, and a lot of extremely Hollywood-like understanding for mental health [evidence] in general.” Mental health evidence admissibility can sometimes seem unclear, and often requires an evaluation to verify its presence in an alleged victim or defendant. Despite these challenges, Dr. Freitas affirms the increasing role of mental health evidence in court and throughout trials³. To put this into perspective, Kathryn M. Davis of the Hastings Law Journal introduces Rape Trauma Syndrome (RTS), which illustrates the response stages rape or attempted rape victims experience after trauma. RTS, coined by Ann Burgess and Linda Holmstrom in 1974, has been used in the legal system as admissible evidence to support a victim’s prosecution, verify traumatic events, and educate juries⁴. However, RTS remains a controversial and often misunderstood concept within the court systems. Much of the controversy arises from debates regarding RTS’ credibility and the argument that other trauma-related conditions can produce similar symptoms. The majority of arguments over the admissibility and understanding of RTS as mental health evidence in the court happens between major court figures such as attorneys and judges. Amidst all of the debate on mental health evidence, it is still important to remember mental health’s role in the development and building of a trial and its respective verdict. The usage of these mental health evidence, though often sought out to emphasize damages, also outline how certain cases evolving around sexual assault should be handled with awareness to the mentality of the victim and those involved. For instance, RTS can be used to demonstrate emotional damages, while also serving as an example of how sensitive sexually-motivated crimes should be handled with precaution and more understanding for the victim and others involved in the trial. Though some of these scientifically proven mental health concepts may be newer and harder to fully grasp, it is crucial for the U.S. Criminal Justice System to broaden their understanding to better accommodate trial proceedings and correct understandings for mental health evidence in forming just verdicts.
III.
Despite growing evidence of the value of mental health evidence, there is still skepticism and an evident gap of knowledge and ability to perceive such evidence. Due to the court system’s focus on merit-based selection when choosing judges and attorneys, judicial panels often consist of older individuals who may have limited exposure to the stigmatization of sexual assault. This trend results in courts leaning towards traditionalism, creating a rift in societal values. In fact, Samatha Zottola, a Senior Research Associate at PRA Inc., noteshow there is a subtle trend showing how older judges are more likely to decline psychological and mental health evidence regarding sexual assault compared to younger and newer judges⁵.
Furthermore, outdated stereotypes around sexual assault have reinforced biases among different generations. Dr. Freitas highlights that it is not uncommon for certain judges and attorneys to “be in the mindset that [the assault] isn’t real, or that [the victim] must have done something to deserve it”⁶. Dr. Freitas gives a major example of older media platforms' role in such stereotypes, raising how industries like Hollywood create an inherently misunderstood concept of certain mental health issues compared to its. The historical context that sexual assault has gone through falsely dramatizes and misinforms the public on the true workings of them.
The knowledge gap is mirrored by the respective mental health evidence. A major reason for a lack of mental health awareness in the judicial court system is that mental health courses and training are not required in law school. Certain courses essential for a future Judge or attorney’s path are required for them to be judicially certified, but the courses relating to understanding psychology and mental health are optional for the individual himself. This presents an issue not only in terms of sustaining that mental health knowledge gap, but also threatens criminal justice when judges or attorneys will have to refer to bias due to a lack of mental health knowledge. Dr. Freitas furthers how “it’s if they want to be educated [on mental health], if they don’t they base a lot of their decisions on their view of mental [health]. And where that stems from depends on their experiences”. The very government system meant to address bias, will have to refer to bias and personal perceptions because they are not forced to acquire the knowledge of mental health--which could ultimately result in injust verdicts for sexual assault cases. For attorneys and judges to preside over sexual assault trials, it is essential to understand the mental health behind sexual assault for the victims (Davis), and how to communicate accordingly. Unfortunately, this is not perfectly carried out due to the mental health knowledge gap , and this gap would just further widen unless a remedy can align societal values with court values⁷.
IV.
Though the U.S. court system is quite stern to dramatic change, there are certain adjustments in the interior of the system that can benefit the goal of bridging mental health gaps in courts. To see what can be modified towards the current court systems, this section will explore possible solutions using what the court already has--specifically those of specialized courts and specialized judges. The U.S. court system splits into the federal court and the state courts; within these paths, each court can be classified in one or more of the following categories: specialized, trial, or district⁸. Most are familiar with the concepts of trial and district courts, but specialized courts are most applicable in terms of mental health and sexual assault cases. Specialized courts, consistent both in federal and state courts, refer to courts specific issues that people on trial must qualify for. They see less cases, yet have a lot more resources to focus on providing service to those on trial, an example could be drug courts, where services are provided, and treatment such as rehabs are set in place⁹. However, sexual assault cases are often ran through the normal criminal courts,occasionally in domestic violence courts, where the victim may have to testify face to face with their perpetrator. Specialized courts modeled for the service of sexual assault victims, who may need certain mental health needs, can be beneficial not only for the progression of the trial, but also focus on special needs that sexual assault cases calls for. However, specialized courts pose another problem where they do not require “specialized” judges. Differing from the nature of the court, the judges presiding over them are not specifically qualified in that field, and just need to be interested to take part in the trial¹⁰. Therefore, an alternative could be having specialized and more qualified judges to preside over sexual assault cases would result in a more professional environment for its complex contents. Not only would it be necessary to contain enough knowledge for mental health and understanding of sexual assault cases, there is always a need to diffuse bias in the face of justice. Applicable to judges, Dr. Freitas adds how peer review and receiving multiple viewpoints can be used to diffuse bias and share a knowledge pool. Having multiple judges, per say, to preside over a sexual assault case could diffuse bias while having multiple lenses for the trial to be peered. Certain portions of the current judicial system can most definitely be slightly shifted when dealing with sexual assault cases to incorporate more mental health awareness.
V.
Aside from possible revisions to the current system, there are also ways through implementation for courts to align with mental health values. For a more effective approach, training programs should be enforced to establish a much needed background to decide on such cases and prepare for them. This training would be extremely beneficial to judges, uprising judges, attorneys, and law school students. Not only would the judges and attorneys be more informed in terms of mental health and current mental health revelations, they would also be informed in terms of trauma and related psychological damages ¹¹. To estimate the best way these trainings can be implemented for the Judges, Eva McKinsey and peers published the findings of a survey on the Judge’s view of these trainings¹². As a result of the course, the main criticisms were compiled on these courses and training sessions:should focus on practicality or how they can apply it to their job ,its benefits beneficial and important for the court understanding that for some judges, it will be hard to culturally shift and adapt to the modern ideals of trauma , offers a range of trauma that may be used within the court, provide inform in a way that would not traumatize the ones who are learning, and provide content and resources that can be provided to every court, as some may not have the monetary aides to receive some. For the structure of these courses, it was compiled that educators should be a variety of individuals, with preferably first hand experience with dealing in these fields, sessions to be grouped specifically for one job within the court, discussion on how such implementation will positively impact the court, and how a theoretically trauma-informed court would look like. However, it is important to note that judges and attorneys schedules may not always be open for such training, so it is crucial that the courses themselves should remain flexible at the same time¹³.
To combat this issue of flexibility and time allowance, it is also suggested for these training and courses to start earlier in a Judge and attorney’s career--such as law school¹⁴. Most judges are inexperienced when it comes to perceiving sexually motivated crimes, and they are even more inexperienced when it comes to incorporating mental health knowledge into it¹⁵. Dr. Freitas reports how “In terms of mental health education in law school, there is actually almost none…unless they express interest in it, they don’t really learn it much. So you will often see a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to what diagnoses are and what they can look like.” Mental health courses are optional in law school, and the incorporation of related courses would benefit the future generation of attorneys, judges, and the court when it comes to handling sexual assault cases from the perspective of mental health awareness.
Aside from training, the U.S. criminal justice system could also incorporate more mental health understanding through the curation of a new role. To lessen the burden on these judges, jurors throughout a trial, and attorneys, a new role along the frameworks of a forensic psychology advisor can be considered. The effectiveness of such a role can be demonstrated through the Dutch Criminal Justice System in the Netherlands, where they have a forensic advisor to work hand in hand with the courts. After many monumental criminal cases, the role of the forensic advisor was created within the Dutch criminal justice system to bridge the forensic knowledge gap within its criminal justice system, and to act as an advisor for forensic evidence. At the same time, these advisors must have no say in opinionated claims but are simply there to insert advice in terms of forensics¹⁶. It is important to note that forensic advisors were crafted with two main goals: to fuse modern forensic science and the criminal justice system, and prevent evidence from being misconceived forensically. Similarly, this seems to be the issue defined within the U.S. criminal justice system when it comes to mental health evidence and sexual assault cases. Structured like a forensic advisor in the Dutch courts, a psychological advisor or forensic psychologist can be used to bridge the existing and ever-widening mental health knowledge gap in the court, while assisting trials through inputting mental health advice¹⁷. An interesting note about the Dutch forensic advisors is that they schedule meetings with Judges to keep them on the current tabs of modern forensics and its advances, and this could be applicable to the U.S. criminal courts where Judges can get updated in terms of mental health evidence by this theoretical advisor. This role is noted as a possible alternative to Judges and attorneys directly learning mental health courses, where a merit-based figure in the field of mental health can bind these knowledge gaps by inputting their own, unbiased, yet factual, expertise.
VI. Conclusion
There is an evident knowledge gap within the judicial system when confronting sexually motivated crimes and its foundational ideas, yet this gap is just continuously widening along with the ever-changing society. Though it is important to maintain alignment with laws and the Constitution, fresh ideas and discoveries are needed to cycle through the courtroom to maintain justice. This adaptation towards sexual assault verdicts will be the most effective through increasing mental health and psychological awareness on those who contribute to the development of a verdict; hence, this study has concluded to make amendments geared towards Judges and jury panels. It is essential that specific training programs, and even educational courses, should be implemented to present and rising Judges so that a foundational knowledge on sexual assault psychology will be ensured. Jurors who are more certified for such cases should also be chosen. Since the contents of sexual assault cases are heavier to handle, and requires the understanding and evaluation of more complex evidence, specifically curated jury pools who are more qualified and specialized should be pushed for to create a competent panel. Studies gathered further suggest that the most effective solution would be to create a role that specializes in advising courts in terms of psychology when dealing with more complex cases. Drawing much inspiration from the Dutch Criminal Court, a role similar to that of a forensic advisor can be incorporated into the American criminal justice system to assist Judges and jurors when assessing sexual assault cases. The judicial flaws peaking from the concern of sexual assault cases is just one emerging example of how the U.S. courts system needs renovation. The need to align the weathered U.S. justice system with modern judicial concerns is a necessary step needed to maintain core American democratic values and justice, and sexual assault injustices is a much area of needed exploration.
FOOTNOTES
1. The People of the State of Illinois v. Drew Clinton,
2 (Ill. Ct.s Comm’n 2024).
2. "Facts and Statistics — Central MN Sexual
Assault Center" Central MN Sexual Assault Center.
3. Corina Freitas, Video conference interview, (14 October 2023).
4. Kathryn M. Davis, "Rape, Resurrection, and the Quest for Truth: The Law and Science of Rape Trauma Syndrome in Constitutional Balance with the Rights of the Accused.", Hastings Law Journal, vol. 49, no. 5, 1998, pp. 1512-16.
5. Samantha Zottola, Video conference interview, (29 November 2023).
6. See Ibid. footnote 3
7. See Id.
8. Cornell University, "Courts Map—PDF", (2020).
9. See Ibid. footnote 5
10. See Id.
11. See Id.
12. Eva McKinsey, et al. "Trauma-Informed Judicial Practice from the Judges' Perspective.", Judicature, vol. 106, no. 2, (Nov. 2022).
13. See Id.
14. See Id.
15. See Ibid. footnote 5
16 Jaimy Meeuwissen, et al. "Forensic Advisers Working for All District Courts and Courts of Appeal in the Netherlands: An Overview and Discussion." Journal of Forensic Sciences, Wiley Online Library, (12 Sept. 2023).
17. Pinto, Blake. "What Role Does Forensic Psychology Play in a Sexual Assault”
Case?" TheChicagoSchool, (5 Oct. 2018).