Document Type

Book Chapter

Publication Date

2024

Abstract

At the core of any legal decision is an assumption that the decision will be “fair,” yet this is an elusive term. A close study of cases involving criminal defendants with mental disabilities shows that many (perhaps most) of the decisions involving this cohort are not “fair” in the contexts of due process and justice. If legal decisions reflect principles such as procedural justice, restorative justice, and therapeutic jurisprudence, the chances of such fairness will be significantly enhanced. This chapter explains why this goal of fairness, in the context of these cases, can never be met absent a consideration of the virulence of sanism and pretextuality, along with the misuse of heuristics and false “ordinary common sense.” These factors enable much of society to ignore gray areas of human behavior, and predispose fact-finders to endorse beliefs in accord with their prior experiences.

Comments

The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making , pp. 17 - 31

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009119375.002 Publisher: Cambridge University Press Print publication year: 2024 Cite to original publication.

Download

Share

COinS