Lawyers: How Psychological Testing Can Lead to Better Plea Bargains-From Elgin and Mchenry

Like many attorneys, you may have considered having a psychologist evaluate your clients who have been criminally charged for the first time. Usually, these cases involve sex crimes perpetrated on minors, although the concept of psychological mitigation can apply to a wide variety of offenses.

In a recent case, a married man with a predisposition for internet-related sex was trapped in a sting by a police officer, posing as an underage girl. After he was arrested, he faced the similar type of criminal charges that apply to career predators, who, over time, specifically target young girls for sex on an ongoing basis.

However, in the interest of proportionality, it is important to note that he was a man who merely stumbled into the wrong chat room on only one occasion.

The fact that the woman was not a legal adult was not part of his attraction to her and in no way, motivated his contact. The primary motivation was that she simply made herself, as a willing female, available for a tryst; her underage status was largely irrelevant to him.

Of course, this defendant had committed a serious crime by agreeing to meet with this supposedly underage woman who was actually a male police officer. However, the question of psychological mitigation is a crucial one when, in the interest of proportionality, one considers what specific type of person or criminal he was.

Was he really a pedophile who engages in the serial pre-meditated process of preying on teenage girls? Or, was he really a man engaged in marital infidelity who was searching for a relatively impersonal sexual tryst with an available female, who just stumbled into a meeting with an underage girl without really noticing her age?

The defense attorney referred the client for a psychological evaluation. The psychologist, after assessing the client, providing a battery of tests, studying the clients history and noting his apparent indifference to the age of teenage girls, produced a report that was useful to his lawyer in arranging a plea bargain.

Through the psychological report, the prosecutor reached the understanding that even though the defendant had committed a sex crime, he was not a serial predator. Therefore, it was determined that he was unlikely to be a future threat to children. As a result, through a plea bargain, a less harsh sentence was sought and subsequently, imposed.

In another case, an attorney initially presented a somewhat similar set of facts. However, after carrying out the evaluation, the psychologist reached the conclusion that the client was a predator because he systematically sought underage partners and had committed carefully premeditated crimes against them.

The U.S. attorney offered a generous plea bargain that was more than fair but the client tenaciously hung on to his unrealistic belief that he would be found not guilty at trial. In this case, the psychologist and the defendants attorney were able to confront his denial regarding the seriousness of the charges.

They were finally able to convince him that taking his case to trial would lead to a much harsher outcome than would his acceptance of the plea bargain that was being offered. After considering the impact of the psychological evaluation on his case, the accused accepted a negotiated seventy two month sentence and was able to avoid the twenty-five plus year sentence that the court would likely have imposed at trial.

Psychologists are able to assist judges and lawyers in comprehending the motivations of criminal defendants who have acknowledged some or all of the charges levied against them. Sometimes, they can also assist defense attorneys in persuading the prosecution to offer favorable plea agreements.

At other times, psychologists can join defense attorneys in convincing their clients to let go of the hope of being exonerated at trial when he or she has already acknowledged the commission of crimes that others would consider repulsive.