Curtis Flowers Psychoanalysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Evidence
Eyewitness Testimony
Quality and Detail in the Initial Witness Statement
Racial Bias
Psychological Analysis
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Serving as a court consultant is a comparatively recent profession for psychologists. Forensics has always been seen as a field of psychiatric knowledge. A consultant’s job is consultative and creative; experts have no direct administration of government over individuals with whom they are asked or assigned to work. A forensics psychologist’s assistance might be sought at any of the three stages of the legal procedure. The psychologist’s most notable role is that of an independent expert in criminal matters. Psychologists also help the court by evaluating prisoners to assess their ability to stand trial. Similarly, therapists can give expert advice on a person’s ability to be a testimony. In civil matters, the psychiatrist may take into account a person’s ability to manage commercial, economic, and intellectual affairs. In domestic relations trials, doctors may testify as evidence for customers seeking custody of children.

Curtis Flowers’ case is one of the most notable Supreme Court rulings examined in a recent couple of decades. Curtis Giovanni Flowers is an African-American person who has been tried six times for the same offense in the United States state of Mississippi (Gibbins, 2022). Flowers’ killing case was dismissed by the Supreme Court this year, but the ultimate verdict has yet to be made. This article delves into the Curtis Flowers case, outlining the intricacies and explaining how circumstantial science and witnesses influenced the case’s result (Baran et al., 2018). Aside from that, it claims that some of the state’s activities during Flowers’ imprisonment and trials were unconstitutional. This work was written to analyze a court case in a psychological direction based on new research by psychologists and other specialists.

Evidence

Flowers’ case was initially advanced by ballistic evidence. However, when new information emerged, opponents began to question the credibility of the earlier evidence. The court’s failure to discover the crucial piece of evidence – the rifle and its rounds – prompted them to question the case’s substance. Investigators were aware from the start that a handgun was used to torture and kill four employees at the furniture store, but it had never been discovered. That fact, in reality, made establishing a link between the defendant and the crime somewhat tricky.

Following the additional inquiry, the court discovered two shots fired from a pistol owned by Curtis Flowers’ step-uncle. The suspect reportedly took the pistol the morning before the incident. Prosecutors were successful in matching the two bullets discovered on the uncle’s home with the one recovered from the mattress at the business. However, the rationale was insufficient to draw any conclusions; therefore, another expert was consulted.

For many years, ballistics theory ruled supreme in criminal justice. However, academics are now questioning its core assumptions. In the instance of Curtis Flowers, there may be a limit to what specialists may assert. The ammunition from the firearms was not retrieved under ideal circumstances. If a comparable inquiry were conducted today, it would be prudent to avoid removing the bullets from the wooden post, as was done in the instance under consideration. Instead, a detective would demand that the entire piece of wood be sent to ensure that the evidence is not tampered with. Furthermore, concentrating on only one or two weapons while eliminating all other alternatives overstates the final link to a crime.

Eyewitness Testimony

Odell Hallmon Jr. was more than likely the most critical witness of all. Hallmon, the defendant’s principal witness, appeared against Flowers in court. Flowers apparently confessed to him while they were both in prison, admitting to murdering four people at the business. Now that the incident of Curtis Flowers has revived and is extensively publicized, Hallmon’s history and personality are receiving more attention than ever. The state’s case expert is a convicted felon who began his criminal work at the age of 12 and has not left the habit for the next thirty years. His existence has been filled with a variety of crimes of various severity: burglary, drug dealing, serious assault, and assassination attempts.

For two reasons, Hallmon’s testimony was critical to resolving Curtis Flowers’ case. For starters, it was the only direct bit of evidence uncovered by prosecutors. All of the others were anecdotal and, hence, significantly weaker. Authorities could not depend entirely on other people’s claims that they saw Flowers heading to the shop or on the link between the weapon and the murder. Hallmon considerably aided the investigation and, in some ways, determined the suspect’s destiny. The second reason is that jurors usually take confession evidence very seriously. When a criminal admits, it is hard for the accused to refute the confession. Hallmon has altered his view regarding Flowers’ case now that he has been sentenced to life in prison, which cannot be overturned. It is believed that the one who imprisoned Flowers may become the person who facilitates his liberation.

Quality and Detail in the Initial Witness Statement

In order for a witness to correctly identify a suspect later on, they must first get a good look at the individual. Furthermore, people are more likely to remember someone they encounter in public if they have a cause to do so, such as witnessing a crime in the process. The initial statement a witness makes to the police is the strongest indicator of whether or not he or she got a good look at the culprit. The submitted description should be thorough and specific. The capacity to remark that the perpetrator had a pointed nose, a goatee, or a deformity, for example, demonstrates that the eyewitness gathered and analyzed by using descriptive information of the original sighting. Gist recollections are the incorrect standard for comparing photographs.

Racial Bias

The result of a trial is frequently determined by individuals who serve on the jury. Curtis Flowers has been through six trials, each of which followed a bizarre pattern. The result of the second trial also included more than one African-American grand jury being hung clean. Nevertheless, when the jury’s black-to-white proportion was shifted to match the white population, capital punishment was imposed. One would conclude that the jury makeup reflected the racial makeup of Montgomery County’s inhabitants. It is now claimed that the grand jury in three instances, was premeditated. The so-called venire – a pool of suitable individuals – was rigged to exclude African Americans. Flowers’ attorneys argued on appeal that the state selected white jurors with skill and experience comparable to black jurors. There were no compelling grounds because the latter should have been excluded. The omissions, however, were affirmed by the Mississippi Supreme Court’s judgment.

Psychological Analysis

By conducting psychological examinations of persons involved in the legal system, forensic psychologists serve an essential role in the American criminal and civil justice systems. Because of the rising variety of defendants in the judicial system, forensic psychologists may encounter considerable obstacles in terms of evaluating techniques among distinct cultural groupings. Performed data used in standardized assessments are not designed or validated in the same way for persons from minority different cultural backgrounds. For instance, minority communities may score higher on risk assessment measures as a result of their heightened exposure to danger and social inequity rather than a higher proclivity to commit a crime.

Forensic psychologists must be aware of the purposeful and unintentional prejudices that race may have throughout the forensic examination process since their psycho-legal judgments might influence a plaintiff’s legal outcome. Regrettably, forensic experts acknowledge that they do not always conduct culturally appropriate evaluations (Hall & Poirier, 2021). Culturally competent pieces of evidence indicate people may include the use of multivariate analyses to aid in the acquisition of norms from measurements that are most representative of the entire population at large, the establishment of separate norms for particular minority, ethnic, and linguistic groups, and the development of new tests that originate from disadvantaged and marginalized cultural contexts themselves and evaluate the expertise and training valued by those belief systems.

A forensic psychologist’s related to cultural competency contributes to the minority group member’s opinion that he or she is being persecuted in the criminal justice process. Despite this evidence, forensic experts continue to conduct minimal studies on the influence of a criminal defendant’s ethnicity (Bartol & Bartol, 2018). Even in locations where forensic intercultural communication is relatively strong, most parts of the forensic assessment process exhibit insufficient cultural sensitivity. Minorities, for instance, are deemed to be more hazardous or violent than their Caucasian opponents.

Competency to stand trial tests is possibly the most prevalent type of criminal forensic psychological evaluation. Because of the rising variety of defendants in the justice process, forensic psychologists may encounter considerable obstacles in terms of evaluating techniques among distinct cultural groupings. Implicit bias theory is based on the idea that everyone has inherent biases that influence their decision-making and behaviors. Minority bias is an essential issue that necessitates a neutral position and culturally appropriate procedures on the part of forensic psychology.

Self-examination, rigorous testing of social prejudices, and thoughtful peer review may all be used to find evidence of biases. The concept of implicit bias theory in psychological science is that forensic psychologists have inherent biases that cause them to make few choices against people in the therapeutic process. Racial prejudice is a broad term that refers to any psychological process or action that affects members of a specific particular ethnicity (M’charek et al., 2020). The notion that racial prejudices are frequently implicit and manifested subtly presents a number of issues for both the legal system and forensic psychiatrists.

This public acknowledgment and apology have various consequences for the discipline of psychiatry as a whole, as well as for other medical and psychiatric professionals. One such conclusion is that acknowledging previous racially motivated damages is required to create more significant progress in inequality and equity as they pertain to persons of various races. It also implies that directly evaluating the impact of ethnicity is more likely to generate helpful information in this respect than a method that does not explicitly explore the potential that race impacts a particular individual’s attitudes and preferences.

In this regard, it is critical to distinguish between racism and racial identification. It is critical to inquire about the cultural structure in order to ascertain the group to which the interviewee claims to belong. Nevertheless, people believe that this is inadequate on its own. The views of oneself and others regarding race are the most beneficial in determining how race may have impacted a specific individual. Ethnicity and the linked domain of black identity are expected to have a significant influence on individuals.

One probable source of the prejudice, as mentioned earlier, is the ethnicity of the individual who initially decides to seek capital charges. Another possible reason for prejudice is that jurors make judgments based on their own and the prosecutor’s ethnicity rather than the facts in the case. It was discovered that white juries were more inclined to condemn black prisoners to death. Failure to comprehend sentencing guidelines may also result in death sentence verdicts if race appears to play a role. When teaching understanding was low, black offenders were more likely to be sentenced to death.

Identification of differences and similarities between the examiners and examinees might have an impact on the kind and quality of data gathered during the examination. Differences in culture between the assessor and the individual being assessed might have a number of implications. The language used by examiners, the queries they pose, and their tolerance while waiting for replies will all be influenced by their culture. The examiner’s background may influence their grasp of specific phrases, family relationships, and even whether or not the examinee initiates visual contact.

The document should detail the examiner’s data-gathering processes for black identity. One stage entails first evaluating the significance and asking some questions concerning racial identity. This should be recorded in this first assessment and does not suggest that more information is required. However, additional evidence must be acquired when it is necessary to assess the link between race and culture and the legal areas under consideration. Information from the data should be provided to describe the information gathered and its significance. The essence of the assessed racial identity and its effect on the results connected with the forensic referral question should determine the exact content of what is reported, with the examiner supporting this perceived composition and relevance to development levels.

Ethnic prejudice, like most of the traits commonly considered by forensic assessors, has the potential to be positive or detrimental to the litigant’s objectives. A scientific evaluator’s role is not to assist either party but to characterize the individual in context as objectively as possible. The evaluator has no influence over how the parties utilize this information. Consider psychotic symptoms, which might be utilized by both a practicing attorney to exonerate a client and a prosecution to impose a harsher punishment (Pozzulo et al., 2021). Similarly, white litigants may attempt to invoke firmly held racist ideas in their family situation as an excuse for filing a false police report. A prosecution seeking a lengthier sentence may utilize the same material.

The death penalty is a highly contentious topic; the debate over the death penalty seems to be multifaceted, involving parties such as its loss of economic viability, its dubious countermeasure value, the implementation of innocent people, reducing popular backing for the death penalty, rising support from the public for the alternate solution term of imprisonment of life in prison without the possibility of supervised release, and lethal injection comprising severe punishments. One of the most vexing issues surrounding harsher punishments is that they appeared to be used unfairly and carelessly, with the overwhelming of capital cases and death row prisoners being men of an ethnic minority indicted, including murdering a representative of the ethnic community.

Conclusion

Curtis Flowers’ claim is complicated enough to require six hearings that have yet to result in a final judgment. Curtis Flowers is an African-American man accused of killing four people at the Tardy Furniture store. The primary reason was that he had been sacked from the store two weeks before the event. The allegation was far from simple: it was based on a few dubious bits of evidence. The murder scene was never located, and authorities relied entirely on muzzle velocity, which has been criticized. There was no eyewitness to the killing, and the only evidence regarded correctly by the prosecution was that of Odell Hallmon. In a chat with Hallmon, Flowers reportedly acknowledged killing four individuals. In Flowers’ instance, the state may have made problematic judgments. First, detectives had faith in Hallmon, who was notorious for cooperating with police departments for personal gain. Secondly, the jury selection process may have been slanted to favor white people.

Curtis Flowers’ argument is one of the most well-known Supreme Court decisions in the past few decades. The first statement a witness provides to the authorities is the primary determinant of whether or not he or she saw the perpetrator. The outcome of a trial is commonly calculated by the members of the jury. Curtis Flowers has gone through six studies, each with its own peculiar rhythm.

Forensic psychologists play an essential part in the criminal or civil justice systems in the United States by performing psych evaluations of those involved in the legal process. Because of the increasing diversity of offenders in the legal system, criminologists may face significant challenges in comparing tactics among various cultural groups. Because their psycho-legal judgments may determine a plaintiff’s correct remedy, forensic psychologists must be mindful of the intended and intentional stereotypes that race may have through the forensic inspection process. Unfortunately, forensic professionals admit that they do not always do socially acceptable assessments.

The cross-culturally of a forensic psychologist adds to the minority group participant’s belief that he or she is being targeted in the justice system. Despite this, forensic professionals continue to implement a limited investigation into the impact of a criminal plaintiff’s race. The implicit bias theory assumes that everyone has prejudices that affect their judgment call and attitude. Minority bias is a severe issue that requires science principles to take a neutral stance and use culturally relevant approaches. Cultural issues between the assessor and the person being evaluated could have a variety of consequences.

The link between ethnicity and jury decision-making is complicated and contentious. Anecdotal information in the shape of current high incidents in the United States dominates press and government debates on the subject. On the other hand, researchers have started developing extensive empirical data on the importance of a victim’s race on jurors, between-race disparities in juror inclinations, and the implications of jury demographic makeup on outcomes and negotiations. These research’s conclusions may not always be continuous, and the subjective experience through which race affects decision-making warrants more exploration. Nonetheless, this body of evidence shows that race has the ability to influence trial performance. This result is relevant from a practical sense, as it has significant consequences for ongoing arguments over predictive jury value, peremptory usage during potential jurors, and racial inequities in capital punishment.

Many recent studies on the subject of defendant race focus on whether white jurors make different decisions in situations featuring white versus black defendants. This emphasis is likely to represent both the medieval setting discussed above and a more current tendency in social scientific research to investigate racial prejudice in terms of the duality of white sensory perceptions and black targets. The conclusions of literature reporting items for systematic laboratory studies on the impact of race on white simulated jurors are inconsistent (Ribeiro & de Matos Soeiro, 2021). However, a global tendency emerges in which whites are more conscience and advocate harsher punishments for black versus white defendants. This finding is supported by a limited number of archiving analyses.

As topics for research in future work, various analyses of how information is collected from people can be considered. Information transmitted verbally is not always reliable and requires analysis not only from detectives and the court but also from psychologists. This is done in order to understand the prejudices of the person and to understand the character. Thus, the investigation will be able to obtain the entire range of information that will be kept behind the testimony of suspects and witnesses.

References

Baran, M., Freemark, S., & Overby, C. (2018). In the dark.

Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2018). Introduction to forensic psychology: Research and application. Sage Publications.

Gibbins, D. (2022). Six trials & twenty-three years later: Curtis Flowers and the need for a more expansive Batson remedy. Houston Law Review, 59(3), 33006.

Hall, H. V., & Poirier, J. (Eds.). (2021). Forensic psychology and neuropsychology for criminal and civil cases. CRC Press.

M’charek, A., Toom, V., & Jong, L. (2020). The trouble with race in forensic identification. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45(5), 804-828.

Pozzulo, J., Bennell, C., & Forth, A. (2021). Forensic psychology. Psychology Press.

Ribeiro, R. A. B., & de Matos Soeiro, C. B. B. (2021). Analyzing criminal profiling validity: Underlying problems and future directions. International journal of law and psychiatry, 74, 101670.

Click Here To Order Now!