Getting away with murder: Vincent Gigante and exculpatory psychiatry.

AuthorVatz, Richard E.
PositionLaw & Justice

ONE ARGUMENT supporting psychiatric testimony in the courtroom is the contention that psychiatrists have valuable insights to offer regarding the concept of mens rea, or criminal intent. It is a debate that affects matters of public policy in the criminal justice system, from the validity of the insanity plea to mitigation of incarceration for those who are judged to be unaccountable be cause their mental status renders them unable--not unwilling--to make rational decisions. It fosters the assumption that diagnosis of mental incompetence can be accomplished independent of nonscientific motives.

For years, psychiatrist Thomas Szasz has maintained that "mental illness" is a metaphor since the mind is not an organ. He contends that the great preponderance of behaviors called mental illness represents "problems in living," not authentic brain disease. He further makes the case that, for some alleged menial disorders, like various schizophrenias, there may be actual brain impairment and therefore one should not use the locution "mental illness." The most compelling claim he puts forth, however, is that there is no justification for assuming the accuracy of psychiatric testimony relating to an accused person's escaping judicial action. By use of such dubious "expert" testimony, Szasz masons, psychiatrists are paid to excuse criminal behavior and provide exculpatory labels for guilty felons.

Those who say that Szasz and other doubters are wrong insist that psychiatry can ascertain who is mentally ill and when an accused felon is responsible for criminal behavior; moreover, some posit that through new technology--like Positron Emission Tomography--malingerers can be identified.

In reality, however, them hardly is ever any way to validate or debunk such testimony--how would you know if a person who claimed to be crazy and/or incoherent was authentically so? On the other hand, the rhetorical mystification of examinations of the brain--achieved through PET scans--is overwhelming, particularly to the average juror. How could an individual juror take it upon himself or herself to doubt the power of PET scans, when positive, to demonstrate "mental illness"?

We finally have a "gotcha" case, that of Vincent Gigante.

Jerry Capeci, who has written extensively about organized crime, has authored Mob Star: The Story of John Gotti and, incongruously enough, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Mafia. Furthermore, for years he penned "Gang Land," a weekly column...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT