In 1985, a Seattle man was arrested and convicted on multiple charges of sexual assault for allegedly raping four women. After serving his 17-year sentence, the man was about to go free in 2002 when a state psychologist evaluated him and determined that he posed too great a danger to be released from jail. King County prosecutors filed a petition to have the man civilly committed.

Following the man's civil commitment trial in 2004, the jury concluded that the man was at a low risk of reoffending and released him from jail. Ten months later, he allegedly assaulted four women, one of whom suffered fatal injuries in the attack. The man was again arrested and convicted of multiple assault crimes. He is currently serving five life sentences.

Civil commitment is a legal process in which a defendant who is deemed to be too dangerous to be released is detained indefinitely by the state, despite having completed his or her court-ordered sentence. In civil commitment cases, the jury is tasked with determining whether the defendant is likely to reoffend. Often, the only evidence presented to the jury is testimony from two forensic psychologists, one hired by the prosecution and one hired by the defense.

Clearly, there is no foolproof way to calculate whether an offender will commit another crime after being released from jail. The forensic psychologists will evaluate the offender and then report back to the jury, offering their prediction of the likelihood that he will reoffend. They will explain how they reached their prediction and describe any mental ailments or disorders that affect the defendant. The jury must then interpret the often-competing reports and decide whether the risk of recidivism is too great to release the defendant.

We will continue this discussion in a second blog post later this week.

Source: The Seattle Times, "Swayed by a psychologist, jury frees 'monster' who attacks again," Christine Willmsen, Jan. 23, 2012