PSYC 379 Study Guide - Final Guide: Insanity Defense, Malingering, Nomothetic
19 Sep 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
379 final: long answer: compare and contrast competence to stand trial and criminal responsibility in terms of criteria and facets of assessment. Defendant has the right to a fair trial in which he or she understands the proceedings and is capable of participating in his/her own defence. Mental disorder at the time of trial. Mental disorder alone is not sufficient (must inhibit right to competency) Defendants are presumed fit unless the issue is raised. Not criminally responsible (or ncrmd) is used instead of insanity defence in canada. Cannot be imposed by a judge on someone who competently chooses not to enter the plea. Did the defendant at the time of the offence: Determine the causal connections between the disorder and deficits. Specify how the deficits may impact functioning at trial. But whether or not someone is competent is a legal question.
