Psychopaths should be given a reprieve?

#22
trackbasher said:
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
SkiCarver said:
trackbasher said:
Werewolf said:
trackbasher said:
You can be diagnosed as a psychopath in prison and as such are deemed 'untreatable' i.e. not responsive to offending behaviour programmes. As such a 'psycho' is referred to Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder units (4 in England) for 'treatment'.
They may remain there for some years before returning to mainstream prisons. Most are lifers and stay in prison. Despite what appears to be received opinion, there are many who will never get out, despite low tariff's set by Judge's.
This would have been the fate of Manuel nowadays, if he hadn't been topped.
The prison systems full of them...........
Cheaper to slot them, then. :wink:
:)
My mother was always against the death penalty. However after a few years dealing with psychopaths even she was doubting that position. She felt that there was generally no possibility of turning a psychopath into someone who is safe to release into society.
And could you trust that they really had been rehabilitated or were they just pretending?
Its a good point. However, psychopaths do not have an emotional reaction to lying. The interview process is there to get the psychopath talking, and they will say whatever they think the interviewer wants to hear, saying truthful stuff in exactly the same way as lies. After the interview, it is essential that all the items discussed in the interview are check by other sources so an assessment can be made of the truthfullness of the statements. Thier lack of concern about lying can therefore be used against them!
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
All the interviews are videotaped so that they can be studied later by Psychologists. Most Psychologists are very good at spotting them early on as are Prison staff. The test devised by Hare is called the Psychopathy check list - revised.
Lifers dread hearing "I think he needs a PCL-R"....
So difficult to fool anyone into thinking they are 'cured' then?
 
#24
kes1 said:
trackbasher said:
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
SkiCarver said:
trackbasher said:
Werewolf said:
trackbasher said:
You can be diagnosed as a psychopath in prison and as such are deemed 'untreatable' i.e. not responsive to offending behaviour programmes. As such a 'psycho' is referred to Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder units (4 in England) for 'treatment'.
They may remain there for some years before returning to mainstream prisons. Most are lifers and stay in prison. Despite what appears to be received opinion, there are many who will never get out, despite low tariff's set by Judge's.
This would have been the fate of Manuel nowadays, if he hadn't been topped.
The prison systems full of them...........
Cheaper to slot them, then. :wink:
:)
My mother was always against the death penalty. However after a few years dealing with psychopaths even she was doubting that position. She felt that there was generally no possibility of turning a psychopath into someone who is safe to release into society.
And could you trust that they really had been rehabilitated or were they just pretending?
Its a good point. However, psychopaths do not have an emotional reaction to lying. The interview process is there to get the psychopath talking, and they will say whatever they think the interviewer wants to hear, saying truthful stuff in exactly the same way as lies. After the interview, it is essential that all the items discussed in the interview are check by other sources so an assessment can be made of the truthfullness of the statements. Thier lack of concern about lying can therefore be used against them!
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
All the interviews are videotaped so that they can be studied later by Psychologists. Most Psychologists are very good at spotting them early on as are Prison staff. The test devised by Hare is called the Psychopathy check list - revised.
Lifers dread hearing "I think he needs a PCL-R"....
So difficult to fool anyone into thinking they are 'cured' then?
My mother started in the prison service with a degree in psychology, eventually getting a masters in forensic psychology and doing all sorts of ongoing training to be able to do the checklist (and other interesting stuff). So I am aware that the people doing the interviews are well trained .... but people are still fallable.
 
#25
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
trackbasher said:
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
SkiCarver said:
trackbasher said:
Werewolf said:
trackbasher said:
You can be diagnosed as a psychopath in prison and as such are deemed 'untreatable' i.e. not responsive to offending behaviour programmes. As such a 'psycho' is referred to Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder units (4 in England) for 'treatment'.
They may remain there for some years before returning to mainstream prisons. Most are lifers and stay in prison. Despite what appears to be received opinion, there are many who will never get out, despite low tariff's set by Judge's.
This would have been the fate of Manuel nowadays, if he hadn't been topped.
The prison systems full of them...........
Cheaper to slot them, then. :wink:
:)
My mother was always against the death penalty. However after a few years dealing with psychopaths even she was doubting that position. She felt that there was generally no possibility of turning a psychopath into someone who is safe to release into society.
And could you trust that they really had been rehabilitated or were they just pretending?
Its a good point. However, psychopaths do not have an emotional reaction to lying. The interview process is there to get the psychopath talking, and they will say whatever they think the interviewer wants to hear, saying truthful stuff in exactly the same way as lies. After the interview, it is essential that all the items discussed in the interview are check by other sources so an assessment can be made of the truthfullness of the statements. Thier lack of concern about lying can therefore be used against them!
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
All the interviews are videotaped so that they can be studied later by Psychologists. Most Psychologists are very good at spotting them early on as are Prison staff. The test devised by Hare is called the Psychopathy check list - revised.
Lifers dread hearing "I think he needs a PCL-R"....
So difficult to fool anyone into thinking they are 'cured' then?
My mother started in the prison service with a degree in psychology, eventually getting a masters in forensic psychology and doing all sorts of ongoing training to be able to do the checklist (and other interesting stuff). So I am aware that the people doing the interviews are well trained .... but people are still fallable.
The prison will also have a consultant psychiatrist on the staff who will probably head up the evaluation team.
 
#27
Trackbasher.
I formed the opinion that some individuals were born 'evil' Damiens without the 666 sort of thing. If you know the sort of conduct I think of as 'evil' and which closely fits in with your psychopath description, do you regard 'evil' as another word for psycho or a separate aberration?
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way? I saw such as just below entry level into what I thought of as 'evil'
 
#28
Markintime said:
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
trackbasher said:
SkiCarver said:
kes1 said:
SkiCarver said:
trackbasher said:
Werewolf said:
trackbasher said:
You can be diagnosed as a psychopath in prison and as such are deemed 'untreatable' i.e. not responsive to offending behaviour programmes. As such a 'psycho' is referred to Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder units (4 in England) for 'treatment'.
They may remain there for some years before returning to mainstream prisons. Most are lifers and stay in prison. Despite what appears to be received opinion, there are many who will never get out, despite low tariff's set by Judge's.
This would have been the fate of Manuel nowadays, if he hadn't been topped.
The prison systems full of them...........
Cheaper to slot them, then. :wink:
:)
My mother was always against the death penalty. However after a few years dealing with psychopaths even she was doubting that position. She felt that there was generally no possibility of turning a psychopath into someone who is safe to release into society.
And could you trust that they really had been rehabilitated or were they just pretending?
Its a good point. However, psychopaths do not have an emotional reaction to lying. The interview process is there to get the psychopath talking, and they will say whatever they think the interviewer wants to hear, saying truthful stuff in exactly the same way as lies. After the interview, it is essential that all the items discussed in the interview are check by other sources so an assessment can be made of the truthfullness of the statements. Thier lack of concern about lying can therefore be used against them!
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
All the interviews are videotaped so that they can be studied later by Psychologists. Most Psychologists are very good at spotting them early on as are Prison staff. The test devised by Hare is called the Psychopathy check list - revised.
Lifers dread hearing "I think he needs a PCL-R"....
So difficult to fool anyone into thinking they are 'cured' then?
My mother started in the prison service with a degree in psychology, eventually getting a masters in forensic psychology and doing all sorts of ongoing training to be able to do the checklist (and other interesting stuff). So I am aware that the people doing the interviews are well trained .... but people are still fallable.
The prison will also have a consultant psychiatrist on the staff who will probably head up the evaluation team.
It's been a few years since my mother was involved with that side of things, and I can't say we discussed the detailed structure of an assessment team! It is an interesting subject though. I have (unfortunately) inherited all my mothers books on psychology and I guess I'll spend some time reading them! I'm sure all the notes we handed to the prison service would have been interesting too, but reading them would have been a bit naughty i suppose!
 
#29
OldRedCap said:
Trackbasher.
I formed the opinion that some individuals were born 'evil' Damiens without the 666 sort of thing. If you know the sort of conduct I think of as 'evil' and which closely fits in with your psychopath description, do you regard 'evil' as another word for psycho or a separate aberration?
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way? I saw such as just below entry level into what I thought of as 'evil'
Nature versus nurture?

I'd have to say both. Some people are born evil, some become evil as a result of their upbringing or even as a result of a single event.

Take a look at war crimes (Mai Lai for example) the brutality that some people find themselves capable of after a traumatic (not sure thats quite the correct word) event. Very few of the people in this category would have been labeled psychotic prior to the act.

I think everyone has it in them to flip, but the trigger point is different for each person. Nurture helps to guide the moral compass but sometimes the trigger point is so fragile that I guess you could say that person is 'born evil'.
 
#30
OldRedCap said:
Trackbasher.
I formed the opinion that some individuals were born 'evil' Damiens without the 666 sort of thing. If you know the sort of conduct I think of as 'evil' and which closely fits in with your psychopath description, do you regard 'evil' as another word for psycho or a separate aberration?
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way? I saw such as just below entry level into what I thought of as 'evil'
Just to add my two penneth, IMHO Evil is a much rarer and inherently harder quality to identify. Evil will, in theory, always take the course of action that is to the detriment of others even when it is to there own detriment, a psychopath never will. One is driven by external concepts the other entirely by internal
 
#32
kes1 said:
OldRedCap said:
Trackbasher.
I formed the opinion that some individuals were born 'evil' Damiens without the 666 sort of thing. If you know the sort of conduct I think of as 'evil' and which closely fits in with your psychopath description, do you regard 'evil' as another word for psycho or a separate aberration?
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way? I saw such as just below entry level into what I thought of as 'evil'
Nature versus nurture?

I'd have to say both. Some people are born evil, some become evil as a result of their upbringing or even as a result of a single event.

Take a look at war crimes (Mai Lai for example) the brutality that some people find themselves capable of after a traumatic (not sure thats quite the correct word) event. Very few of the people in this category would have been labeled psychotic prior to the act.

I think everyone has it in them to flip, but the trigger point is different for each person. Nurture helps to guide the moral compass but sometimes the trigger point is so fragile that I guess you could say that person is 'born evil'.
Your comment "Take a look at war crimes (Mai Lai for example) the brutality that some people find themselves capable of after a traumatic (not sure thats quite the correct word) event. Very few of the people in this category would have been labeled psychotic prior to the act." is a good example, IMHO, of my bad barrel concept. Nice American WASP boys who all say Sir and Maam did what they did because of outside influences. Vietnam was the bad barrel.
 
#33
OldRedCap said:
Trackbasher.
I formed the opinion that some individuals were born 'evil' Damiens without the 666 sort of thing. If you know the sort of conduct I think of as 'evil' and which closely fits in with your psychopath description, do you regard 'evil' as another word for psycho or a separate aberration?
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way? I saw such as just below entry level into what I thought of as 'evil'
A mixture of both I think;

The nature versus nurture debate;
Some people appear to be born evil - an example would be someone that has had a good upbringing, nice parents in a good job, a sibling that is normal but who goes on to commit the most horrendous crime without a shred of remorse, minimsing and denying their involvement etc.and will carry on as 'normal'

A nurture example would be someone who has no problems with anybody but hates child sex offenders to the extent that he kills those he comes into contact with, again without any remorse, because he was abused as a child, but is otherwise 'normal';could be said that he was a good apple that was corrupted. However, life is full of people that have made a success of themselves coming from a 'bad' background.

I personally think some people are born evil and there's not a damned thing you can do with them....and I reckon the psychopaths that end up in prison would mostly fit this description, - then you could get into the 'mad or bad argument' which I suppose is what this threads all about.

I'm not aPsychologist but I know this subject has all sorts of papers and dissertations written about it!!...
 
#34
OldRedCap said:
Slightly off that topic but what can you add to the theory that there is really no such thing as a bad apple. What happens is a good apple gets put into a bad barrel and is made bad that way?
Exactly, look at the schools, its all there, if your average "good" kid has to go to these crap schools then watch the apple turn......

(I do however believe there must be some "nature" involved, just not sure of the percentage)
 
#35
This is the problem with the judical system.

Who gives a carp if the defendent couldn´t tell right from wrong?, feels emotion or not? or did it in the heat of the moment or cold blooded planning.

A person has been killed, and person (or persons)did it.

Is the defendent one of those who denied a person their right to life? Yes? Off to the gallows they go then...

Cheaper for the economy you see, and less hassle in the nick, keeps the numbers down.
 
#36
chocolate_frog said:
This is the problem with the judical system.

Who gives a carp if the defendent couldn´t tell right from wrong?, feels emotion or not? or did it in the heat of the moment or cold blooded planning.

A person has been killed, and person (or persons)did it.

Is the defendent one of those who denied a person their right to life? Yes? Off to the gallows they go then...

Cheaper for the economy you see, and less hassle in the nick, keeps the numbers down.
Wright? Fisher? You'd hang them?
 
#37
chocolate_frog said:
This is the problem with the judical system.

Who gives a carp if the defendent couldn´t tell right from wrong?, feels emotion or not? or did it in the heat of the moment or cold blooded planning.

A person has been killed, and person (or persons)did it.

Is the defendent one of those who denied a person their right to life? Yes? Off to the gallows they go then...

Cheaper for the economy you see, and less hassle in the nick, keeps the numbers down.
I have thought that an improvement would be for those who kill to be tried as now. If found guilty, they be identified as the person who killed X and released into the community with no witness protection package etc. If those who loved X wish to, they can hunt the bloke down and kill him as and how they wish. They would then go on trial and the process of establishing blame repeated. Sort of democratised homicide that does not attract any State punishment. Those who executed the bloke who killed their X, get full safisfaction and do not regard the law as a circus such as in the lorry driver kills 6 trial.
 
#38
SkiCarver said:
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
Interesting. So could you somehow use this sort of in reverse to detect them? Something along the lines of wire them up to one of the things and get them to answer a list of questions truthfully and then get them to answer another batch with answers that you know are lies. If they don't have a reaction then it's a fairly good indicator.
 
#39
Markintime said:
chocolate_frog said:
This is the problem with the judical system.

Who gives a carp if the defendent couldn´t tell right from wrong?, feels emotion or not? or did it in the heat of the moment or cold blooded planning.

A person has been killed, and person (or persons)did it.

Is the defendent one of those who denied a person their right to life? Yes? Off to the gallows they go then...

Cheaper for the economy you see, and less hassle in the nick, keeps the numbers down.
Wright? Fisher? You'd hang them?
Don´t know..... who are they?
 
#40
Brick said:
SkiCarver said:
It is also worth noting that because of the lack of reaction to lying, a psychopath has no reaction for a lie detector machine to measure, which is why there results are worthless.
Interesting. So could you somehow use this sort of in reverse to detect them? Something along the lines of wire them up to one of the things and get them to answer a list of questions truthfully and then get them to answer another batch with answers that you know are lies. If they don't have a reaction then it's a fairly good indicator.
the difficulty is that the stress reaction to lying which is measured, would not be there if the subject has been asked to lie. It is the individuals fear of being caught in a lie which causes the effects.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top