U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Role of the Expert Witness in Canadian Dangerous Offender Hearings

NCJ Number
186687
Journal
Psychiatry, Psychology and Law Volume: 6 Issue: 1 Dated: 1999 Pages: 13-21
Author(s)
E. M. Coles; F. E. Grant
Date Published
1999
Length
9 pages
Annotation
Part XXIV of the Canadian Criminal Code, under which certain offenders may be designated "dangerous offenders," has recently been revised; this article provides a summary of the changes and legislation as it now stands and reviews the role of the mandated expert witness.
Abstract
According to the Canadian Criminal Code, a "dangerous offender" is "a person who has committed one of the specified serious personal injury offenses and has manifest either a pattern of repetitive behavior that shows a failure of restraint and a likelihood of causing harm to others; a pattern of persistent aggressive behavior showing a substantial degree of indifference to others; any behavior that compels the conclusion that future behavior is unlikely to be inhibited by normal standards of restraint; or conduct that has shown a failure to control sexual impulses and a likelihood of causing harm to others through a similar failure in the future." Under Bill C-55, changes for psychiatry are reference to "an assessment performed by experts" rather than the testimony of two psychiatrists; the addition of a new category of high-risk offender; a change in the initial review for full parole of dangerous offenders from 3 to 7 years; and reduced concern with treatability. Under these changes it is implied that expert testimony in Canadian dangerous-offender hearings should not address the ultimate issue of dangerousness; rather, it should focus on the mental state and personality of the offender. Psychometric assessments of risk may supplement a psychiatric assessment, but should not replace it. This paper discusses in detail the determination of "dangerous" and the substantiation of expert opinion through cross-examination of expert witnesses in dangerous-offender hearings. 69 notes

Downloads

No download available

Availability