Forensic Assessment Case Study: Brian David Mitchell Trial Analysis

This case study analyzes the forensic assessment of Brian David Mitchell, the kidnapper of Elizabeth Smart. The assignment begins with a summary of the case, detailing Mitchell's kidnapping of Smart and subsequent trial. It highlights the initial declaration of Mitchell's unfitness to stand trial due to insanity, which was later overturned after a psychiatric evaluation by Dr. Welner. The assessment focuses on Welner's testimony, which asserted that Mitchell suffered from antisocial personality disorder, alcohol abuse, and psychopathic disorder but was still mentally competent to stand trial. The paper further discusses the importance of assessing a defendant's competency in the criminal justice system, including the criteria for determining fitness for trial, such as the ability to understand the proceedings and cooperate with counsel. The author concludes that Mitchell was fit to stand trial based on his awareness of the courtroom proceedings and his understanding of the situation, even though he did not cooperate.

Running Head: FORENSIC ASSESSMENT 1
Forensic Assessment
Name
Institution
Date

FORENSIC ASSESSMENT 2
Forensic Assessment
Smart was kidnapped by Mitchell at the age of fourteen in her home at Utah (Bullock et
al., 2013). She was kidnapped at knife point and was held at his home alongside with his wife,
Ileen (now deceased) (Bullock et al., 2013). During this time that she was kidnapped, Mitchell
repeatedly raped Smart (Morewitz, 2019). Mitchell, the 57-year-old homeless kidnapper,
pretended to be a religious preacher (Morewitz, 2019).
Originally, Mitchell had been declared unfit to stand trail. The main reason for the
declaration was insanity. However, upon further evaluation with a psychiatrist, Dr. Welner, the
ruling was reversed and Michelle was given a life sentence (Effron, 2011). Dr. Welner was hired
to reexamine the defendant’s mental state. Welner conducted interviewees with several people
who had personal contact with Mitchell including Smart and also spent hours with Mitchell in
order to ascertain his mental state. During trial, Welner who was the key witness in the Brian’s
insanity and competency phase asserted that Mitchell was mentally competent (Reavy, 2010). He
testified that the defendant suffered from an anti-social personality disorder, alcohol abuse, and
psychopathic disorder (Effron, 2011). However, despite of all these disorders, Welner confirmed
Brian was not mentally ill hence was fit to stand trial.
It is a requirement in the criminal justice system to confirm if a person is fit to stand trial.
This phase is very crucial as it dignifies the process and is also a way of respecting the autonomy
of a defendant (Lipsitt et al., 1971). Forensic psychiatrists are charged with the responsibility to
assess the mental competence of defendants. Some of the ways that are used to determine the
competence of defendants by assessing the defendant’s decision making process, through clinical
evaluation on the defendant, use of collateral information, as well as the use of expert opinion
(Hoge, 2016). Standardized assessment tools are used in the process of assessing competency.

FORENSIC ASSESSMENT 3
For a one to be deemed fit for trial, the defendant has to have the capability to understand
the purpose and nature of the trial proceedings against him (Lipsitt et al., 1971). In addition, the
defendant has to be in a position to cooperate with council in his defense. It is also important to
ensure that the defendant is in a position to comprehend charges against him as well as any
penalties incase he/she is convicted (Hoge, 2016). Having a clear understanding of the courtroom
proceeding as well as those in it is also important in determining whether a defendant is
competent.
Based on the case I believe that Brian was fit to stand trial. This is because Mitchell was
aware of the court proceedings and individuals in the courtroom. Besides, prior to the trial,
Mitchell was aware of things surrounding him and met the competency standards of an
individual viable to stand trial. He just did not want to cooperate with the trail so as to be deemed
incompetent to stand the trail.
References
Bullock, C. F., Spratt, M., & John, S. L. (2013). Newspapers Provide Context in Elizabeth Smart
Abduction. Newspaper Research Journal, 34(4), 24-39.
Effron, L.(2011). Dr. Michael Welner Describes Evaluating Elizabeth Smart's Kidnapper Brian
David Mitchell. Retrieved From https://abcnews.go.com/Health/inside-mind-elizabeth-
smarts-kidnapper/story?id=14318730

FORENSIC ASSESSMENT 4
Hoge, S. K. (2016). Competence to stand trial: An overview. Indian journal of
psychiatry, 58(Suppl 2), S187.
Lipsitt, P. D., Lelos, D., & McGARRY, A. L. (1971). Competency for trial: A screening
instrument. American Journal of Psychiatry, 128(1), 105-109.
Morewitz, S. (2019). Nonfamily Juvenile Abduction. In Kidnapping and Violence (pp. 41-46).
Springer, New York, NY.
Reavy, P. (2010). Brian David Mitchell has personality disorder, not mental illness, psychiatrist
testifies. Retrieved from https://www.deseret.com/2010/12/8/20158854/brian-david-
mitchell-has-personality-disorder-not-mental-illness-psychiatrist-testifies#elizabeth-
smart-arrives-at-court-for-accused-kidnapper-brian-david-mitchells-trial-in-salt-lake-city-
tuesday