header-logo header-logo

Expert witness update: The psychology of predicting violence

31 May 2024 / Dr Tanya Garrett , Dr Rosie Gray
Issue: 8073 / Categories: Features , Profession , Criminal , Career focus
printer mail-detail
Tanya Garrett & Rosie Gray explain why solicitors should be careful who they instruct to undertake violence risk assessments
  • Covers different types of violence risk assessment, and shows why the SPJ approach is superior.
  • Offers advice on instructing risk assessment professionals.
  • Highlights risks for solicitors who make a poor choice when instructing an expert risk assessment professional.

Risk assessments are often commissioned in both criminal and family cases, looking at the risk of physical violence, sexual violence and domestic abuse. But what’s the science behind them, and who should be doing them and who shouldn’t? We decided to write this article because of concerns about the quality of these assessments that we’ve seen in our practice as expert psychologists.

The purpose of a risk assessment is to help the court decide whether someone poses a risk—of what, to what degree, in what circumstances, and to whom, and, crucially, to ‘develop interventions to manage or reduce that risk’ (Boer, Hart, Kropp and Webster

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll