New York - In a newly published article that refines pioneering work to define criminal depravity, researchers at The Forensic Panel have demonstrated a valid, reliable methodology for assessing the level of depravity in non-homicide violent crimes. “The Depravity Standard for Violent Crimes,” published in the International Journal for Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (attached here), informs evidence-based determination of which violent crimes are or are not “heinous,” “atrocious” and “depraved,” enhancing fairness in sentencing and limiting biasing effects.
The Depravity Standard guide now provides a means by which investigation can illustrate whether a crime is among the worst of violent offenses, or whether a defendant or inmate’s offense is unremarkable and more deserving of earlier release. As such, the Depravity Standard promotes diligent inquiry of the components of a violent, non-homicide crime, to the end of informing fair criminal sentencing. The work follows up on the seminal published work (attached here) in which the Depravity Standard was validated for application to homicide and attempted homicide cases. Yet depravity does not limit itself to murder, and the same challenges of defining the worst of crimes present in other violent crimes as well. The Depravity Standard for Violent Crimes,” informs those sentencing challenges of the universe of assaults and other attacks that cause injury that confront courts and judges every day.
Michael Welner, M.D., Chairman of The Forensic Panel, led a research team directed by Kate O’Malley in a multi-stage effort. The research developed twenty-five items of a Depravity Standard comprising the most extreme examples of a perpetrator’s intent, one’s actions, victims chosen, and the perpetrator’s attitude about the offense after the fact. The research team then data mined 393 detailed case files by several American jurisdictions to refine the item definitions and ensure they occurred in only a minority of cases; to determine interrater reliability in applying the definitions of these items; and, mine for the frequency of each item’s occurrence.
The data generated from these adjudicated violent offenses was combined with 1590 participant survey responses ranking the relative depravity of each item. A straightforward, weighted scoring system emerges from this methodology that is readily applied to measuring depravity in violent crime cases.
Dr. Welner, a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai in New York, whose thirty years of forensic psychiatry case experience in jurisdictions all over the United States shapes his views on criminal justice policy, explains: “Justice reform is a great concept – in theory. But without fairness, “reform” is just a great sounding idea whose implementation leads to cynicism for policies that please one side and disenchant another. The Depravity Standard is next-generation justice reform because its entire premise is that the most severe of sentencing needs to be reserved for the worst crimes. And, that determination of what aspects of crime are the “worst” can be directed by the general American population that sits on juries, is victimized by crime, may be prosecuted for offenses, or may be family members touched by any point in the process. It embodies representative justice and civil rights aided through the potentials of science and evidence.”
The Depravity Standard demonstrates that the need for punishment of the most severe can be informed by scientifically validated and reliable methodology. It also demonstrates that an evidence-based approach that thoroughly informs a crime’s intent, its actions, the victim choice, and the attitude of the perpetrators is a bias-free approach for distinguishing the worst of crimes. These items include:
25 Depravity Standard Items for the Violent Crimes Evidence Guide
|
1
|
Intent to emotionally traumatize the victim, maximizing terror, through humiliation, or intent to create an indelible emotional memory of the event
|
|
2
|
Intent to maximize damage or destruction, by numbers or amount if more than one person is victimized, or by degree if only one person is victimized
|
|
3
|
Intent to cause permanent physical disfigurement
|
|
4
|
Intent to carry out a crime for excitement of the criminal act
|
|
5
|
Targeting victims who are not merely vulnerable, but helpless
|
|
6
|
Exploiting a necessarily trusting relationship to the victim
|
|
7
|
Influencing depravity in others in order to destroy more
|
|
8
|
Crime reflects intent of progressively increasing depravity
|
|
9
|
Carrying out a crime in order to terrorize others
|
|
10
|
Carrying out crime in order to gain social acceptance or attention, or to show off
|
|
11
|
Influencing criminality in others to avoid prosecution or penalty
|
|
12
|
Disregarding the known consequences to the victim
|
|
13
|
Intentionally targeting victims based upon prejudice
|
|
14
|
Prolonging the duration of a victim's physical suffering
|
|
15
|
Unrelenting physical and emotional victimization; amount of victimization
|
|
16
|
Exceptional degree of physical harm; amount of damage
|
|
17
|
Unusual and extreme quality of suffering of the victim, including terror and helplessness
|
|
18
|
Indulgence of actions, inconsistent with the social context
|
|
19
|
Carrying out crime in unnecessarily close proximity to the victim
|
|
20
|
Excessive response to trivial irritant; actions clearly disproportionate to the perceived provocation
|
|
21
|
Pleasure in response to the actions and their impact
|
|
22
|
Falsely implicating others, knowingly exposing them to wrongful penalty and the stress of prosecution
|
|
23
|
Projecting responsibility onto the victim; feeling entitlement to carry out the action
|
|
24
|
Disrespect for the victim after the fact
|
|
25
|
Indifference to the actions and their impact
|
“The process of deciding the worst has to transcend bias – and that is what evidence-based justice does,” explains Dr. Welner. The development of The Depravity Standard has clear and careful means for studying the components of a crime and even of the relative culpability of co-conspirators, and is designed to guide juries and judges and to inspire investigators to more fully inform them about the fine points of a crime. At the same time, it is a path for showing which offenders should not be overcharged and should be considered first for early release from overcrowded situations or under alternate pathways.
Adds Dr. Welner, “Evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is one threshold. However, evidence of how severe a crime is, and how severe one’s intent, actions, and attitude are require greater depth of scrutiny. The result is a more informed jury, a predictably fairer outcome, and a case whose justice survives the test of time.”
For more information about how to apply The Depravity Standard in your case or appeal, contact: Michael Welner, M.D., Chairman, The Forensic Panel, drwelner@forensicpanel.com.
To review “The Depravity Standard for Violent Crimes,” click here.
To review validating background on The Depravity Standard, click here.
To review validating research on the development of The Depravity Standard, click here.
To review research on the application of The Depravity Standard to murder cases, click here.
To participate in the Depravity Standard survey, click here.
