Suppr超能文献

“风险评估”的专家证据与“危险犯”的预防性羁押

Expert Evidence of "Risk Assessments" and the Preventive Detention of "Dangerous Prisoners".

机构信息

Forensic Psychiatrist, West Moreton Prison Mental Health Service, Queensland Health; Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Queensland.

Forensic Psychologist, Australian Forensic and Personal Injury Consultants, Southport, Australia; Adjunct Professor Thomas More Law School Australian Catholic University; Adjunct Professor School of Law, La Trobe University; Adjunct Professor School of Psychology and Public Health La Trobe University; Adjunct Professor School of Psychology and Counselling University of Southern Queensland; Distinguished Alumnus, La Trobe University.

出版信息

J Law Med. 2023 Dec;30(4):917-961.

Abstract

The Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) provides for the preventive detention of a prisoner if there is "acceptable, cogent evidence" to a "high degree of probability" that the prisoner is a "serious danger to the community" because of an "unacceptable risk" that the prisoner will commit a "serious sexual offence". In preventive detention cases courts rely on the expert opinion of psychiatrists and psychologists who often use actuarial risk assessment instruments. In Black v Attorney-General (Qld) [2022] QCA 253 the Queensland Court of Appeal considered a decision to detain an offender who had a history of possessing and trading child sexual exploitation material but who had not previously been proved to have committed a contact offence against a child. This article analyses the reasoning of the Court of Appeal and critically examines the reliability of probabilistic risk assessment tools and the validity of expert evidence about risk in the preventive detention context.

摘要

2003 年《昆士兰州危险囚犯(性犯罪者)法案》规定,如果有“可接受的、令人信服的证据”,以“高度的可能性”表明囚犯因为“无法接受的风险”而对“社区构成严重威胁”,即囚犯“极有可能”犯下“严重性犯罪”,那么可以对囚犯进行预防性拘留。在预防性拘留案件中,法院依赖精神病学家和心理学家的专家意见,而他们通常使用概率风险评估工具。在 Black v Attorney-General (Qld) [2022] QCA 253 一案中,昆士兰州上诉法院考虑了对一名有持有和交易儿童性剥削材料历史但此前未被证明犯有接触儿童罪的罪犯进行拘留的决定。本文分析了上诉法院的推理,并批判性地审查了概率风险评估工具的可靠性以及专家在预防性拘留环境下关于风险的证据的有效性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验