In both instances, the Court held there was no vio-
lation of due process.Michael L. PerlinSee also Criminal Responsibility, Assessment of; Guilty but
Mentally Ill Verdict; Insanity Defense, Juries and; Insanity
Defense Reform Act (IDRA); Mental Health Law;
Treatment and Release of Insanity AcquitteesThis entry is largely adapted from Perlin, M. L. (2002).
Mental disability law: Civil and criminal(2nd ed., chap. 9).
Newark, NJ: Matthew Bender.Further Readings
American Law Institute. (1962). Model penal code.
Philadelphia: Author.
Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. ____ 126 S. Ct. 2709 (2006).
Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954)
(overruled in United States v. Brawner, 471 F. 2d 969
(D.C. Cir. 1972).
Finger v. State of Nevada, 27 P.3d 66 (Nev. 2001).
Goldstein, A. S. (1967). The insanity defense. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Low, P. W., Jeffries, J. C., & Bonnie, R. J. (2000). The trial of
John W. Hinckley, Jr.: A case study in the insanity defense
(2nd ed.). New York: Foundation Press.
Morris, N. (1984). Madness and the criminal law. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
People v. Wells, 202 P. 2d 63 (Cal. 1949).
Perlin, M. L. (1989/1990). Unpacking the myths: The
symbolism mythology of insanity defense jurisprudence.
Case Western Reserve Law Review, 40 , 599–731.
Perlin, M. L. (1994). The jurisprudence of the insanity
defense. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Perlin, M. L. (1997). “The borderline which separated you
from me”: The insanity defense, the authoritarian spirit,
the fear of faking, and the culture of punishment. Iowa
Law Review, 82 , 1375–1426.
Perlin, M. L. (2002). Mental disability law: Civil and
criminal(2nd ed., Vol. 4). Newark, NJ: Matthew Bender.
Regina v. Oxford, 173 Eng. Rep. 941 (1840).
Rex v. Arnold, 16 How. St. Tr. 695 (1724).
Slobogin, C. (1985). The guilty but mentally ill verdict: An
idea whose time should not have come. George
Washington Law Review, 53 , 494–527.
State v. Pike, 49 N.H. 399, 442 (1870).
United States v. Brawner, 471 F.2d 969 (1973).
Weiner, B. A. (1985). Mental disability and criminal law. In
S. J. Brakel, J. Parry, & B. A. Weiner (Eds.),The mentally
disabled and the law(3rd ed., pp. 693–773). Chicago:
American Bar Association.CRISIS ANDHOSTAGE NEGOTIATION
Since the 1970s, some clinical psychologists (often
referred to as operational psychologists) have become
more actively involved in the resolution of critical
incident situations, which are classified as either
hostage situations or crisis intervention situations.
Police psychologists are valuable contributors to the
training of tactical and crisis/hostage negotiators. On-
scene responsibilities for operational psychologists
include providing professional consultation on the
potential behavioral effects of psychopathology and
psychopharmacology, selection of primary and backup
negotiators, suggestions and input regarding the actual
negotiation process, and operational consultation to
the tactical commander. Research shows that police
departments that employ psychologists during special
operation responses have significantly fewer casual-
ties of both hostages and hostage takers and more
incidents that are peacefully resolved via a negotiated
surrender than by a tactical entry or violent confronta-
tion. Police psychologists, in providing cogent consul-
tation and robust training dynamics to specialized
police crisis response teams, have made a dramatic
contribution to reducing the risk of injury and death
for all participants in these critical events.Hostage and Crisis Negotiation
Within both federal and local law enforcement envi-
ronments, a hostage situation has become defined as
any situation in which individuals are being held via
active coercion by another person or people and
demands are being made by the hostage taker(s). These
demands are by design established by the hostage
taker(s) to gain compliance as well as establish an
inherent power by the hostage taker(s) over the
responding law enforcement agency. Typically, a
hostage situation results from the interruption of a
criminal act in which the perpetrators take hostages
with an ultimate goal of forcing law enforcement to
comply with their demands for escape. At the other
end of the continuum are hostage situations initiated
by a terrorist group whose goal is to communicate their
political agenda via media exposure. The terrorists
attempt to actualize this confrontation by using the
hostages as political pawns, as the terrorists have the
option of choosing martyrdom for themselves and/or
death to the hostages if their demands are not met.Crisis and Hostage Negotiation——— 167C-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:41 PM Page 167