Monday, May 28, 2012

Research brief: Competency evaluation expert agreement




Click on image to enlarge




Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2012/05/top-ten-recent-ssrn-downloads-3.html


--------------------------------------
Sent from K. McGrew IPhone
----------------------------------
www.themindhub.com
Purpose-Passion-Serendipity
-----------------------------------

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Death Sentence Reviews Leave Unsettled Issues — Death Penalty | The Texas Tribune

Death Sentence Reviews Leave Unsettled Issues

Dr. George Denkowski conducted psychological exams for 14 current death row inmates. 1) Anthony Pierce 2) Virgilio Maldonado 3) Calvin Hunter 4) Roosevelt Smith Jr. 5) Derrick Charles  6) Steven Butler 7) John Matamoros 8) Joel Escobedo 9) Jamie McCoskey 10) Warren Rivers  11) Tomas Gallo  12) Kim Ly Lim 13) Alfred Brown 14) Coy Wesbrook
Dr. George Denkowski conducted psychological exams for 14 current death row inmates. 1) Anthony Pierce 2) Virgilio Maldonado 3) Calvin Hunter 4) Roosevelt Smith Jr. 5) Derrick Charles 6) Steven Butler 7) John Matamoros 8) Joel Escobedo 9) Jamie McCoskey 10) Warren Rivers 11) Tomas Gallo 12) Kim Ly Lim 13) Alfred Brown 14) Coy Wesbrook

Stanley Schneider was shocked last year when Texas' highest criminal court sent his death row client an early Christmas gift of sorts, ordering the trial court to re-examine evidence from a psychologist who had decided that John Reyes Matamoros was mentally fit to face execution.

"We were hopeful their sending it back would mean something," Schneider said.

But his hope flagged in March when, he said, two Harris County state district judges virtually rubber-stamped Dr. George Denkowski's findings in the cases of Matamoros and a fellow death row inmate, Steven Butler. Denkowski, the psychologist who testified in the cases of 14 current Texas death row inmates that the convicted men were mentally fit for execution, was reprimanded last year after other psychologists and defense lawyers filed a complaint alleging that he had used discredited evaluation methods.

Lawyers for Matamoros and Butler, who have filed objections with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, say any findings by Denkowski should be disregarded. They said that the trial court judges — who are husband and wife — simply adopted Denkowski's conclusions instead of examining reams of evidence from other psychologists that they said proved their clients were mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty.

"This is a perfect example of the state taking science and trying to prostitute it," Schneider said, adding, "The role of the courts is to protect us from junk science."

The Tribune thanks our Supporting Sponsors

Judge Marc Brown, of Harris County District Court, who reviewed the Matamoros case, was in trial and did not respond to a request for comment. His wife, Judge Susan Brown, declined to comment on the Butler case because it is continuing. Calls to Denkowski were not returned.

But Roe Wilson, Harris County assistant district attorney, contended that the judges had disregarded Denkowski's findings.

The judge's findings in Butler's case repeatedly refer to Denkowski's findings, but Wilson said the references were "historical."

"There was no consideration given and no mention given," Wilson said.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in 2002 that states could not execute people who were mentally retarded. The court allowed states to decide on guidelines for determining whether a person was mentally retarded. Texas courts have adopted a three-part definition that requires the convicted inmate to have below-average intellectual function, to lack adaptive behavior skills and to have had these problems since an early age.

Denkowski conducted tests to determine whether defendants who might face the death penalty aligned with those definitions.

But other psychologists and defense lawyers complained that he artificially inflated intelligence scores to make defendants eligible for the death penalty. (Denkowski's lawyer has said that he vigorously denies having violated any psychology board rules and that he used his best clinical judgment in making forensic evaluations.)

Last year, the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists agreed to a settlement with Denkowski in which it reprimanded him, but he did not admit guilt. He agreed not to conduct intellectual disability evaluations in future criminal cases and to pay a fine of $5,500. In return, the board dismissed the complaints.

The Tribune thanks our Supporting Sponsors

Since that reprimand, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has asked trial courts to review at least six cases that included Denkowski's work to determine what effect it had had on the case.

Defense lawyers argue that Denkowski's conclusions should be completely excluded from those reviews.

"You can talk all day long about how you don't want junk science used in these cases, but when you're confronted with it, you have to take active steps to make sure it hasn't contaminated the case," said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which represents death row inmates.

The Butler and Matamoros cases are the first to be returned to the Court of Appeals.

Butler, who was also sentenced to life in prison for a separate conviction of aggravated sexual assault with a weapon, was sentenced to death in 1988 for the shooting death of Velma Clemons, a clerk at a dry-cleaning business.

Denkowski evaluated Butler, and he testified in the case in 2006. School records showed Butler had been classified as "educable but mentally retarded," but Denkowski said nothing in the records indicated that he required special education. He noted that Butler could tell time and could recite his Social Security number, "highly atypical skills for a mentally retarded person." He concluded that Butler's I.Q. was borderline normal.

Similarly, Judge Susan Brown concluded that Butler's poor academic performance reflected underachievement and poor choices, not lack of intellectual function. She also wrote that he had enough intellectual ability to plan, commit and then lie about the murder for which he was convicted.

Dick Burr, a defense lawyer, said the judge had ignored findings by experts hired by Butler's lawyers, including Dr. Denis Keyes, a special education professor at the College of Charleston, and Dr. Jack Fletcher, a psychology professor at the University of Houston. Both found that Butler had a low I.Q. and was mentally retarded.  Fletcher — one of the psychologists who complained to the board about Denkowski's work — said that Denkowski's conclusion that Butler was mentally fit for execution "was based on outmoded, no-longer-accepted information."

"Our evidence demonstrated very persuasively that Steven Butler has mental retardation," Burr said.

Matamoros, whose criminal history included auto theft and burglary with intent to sexually assault, was convicted of the 1990 murder of 70-year-old Eddie Goebel, who was found in his bed with 25 stab wounds.

Denkowski concluded in 2006 that Matamoros was not mentally retarded. His low I.Q. scores and a psychologist's finding in 1977 that at 14 Matamoros had a mild intellectual disability, Denkowski concluded, were a result of bilingualism and his rearing in a deprived environment.

Judge Marc Brown agreed, quoting from a federal court ruling in the case that in turn relied on Denkowski's findings. Like Denkowski, the judge concluded that Matamoros's ability to care for himself as an inmate and to plan and commit crimes also contradicted his claims of mental retardation.

Judge Brown's findings discounted the evaluations of psychologists hired by Matamoros's lawyers who found that he was mentally retarded.

Dr. Thomas Oakland, a psychologist and a professor at the University of Florida, reviewed Denkowski's findings along with Judge Marc Brown's ruling. Both, he said, showed a "reckless disregard" for established forensic psychology.

"Based upon my review of Denkowski's affidavit and testimony, it is my opinion that Matamoros's intelligence was and is significantly subaverage," he wrote in an affidavit.

Wilson, the assistant district attorney in Harris County, disputed the inmates' lawyers' argument that the judges' findings were largely copied from Denkowski's work.

"I don't think that is an accurate characterization, but that is something the Court of Criminal Appeals will determine," she said.

Lawyers for Butler and Matamoros want the Court of Criminal Appeals to insist that the death row inmates' claims be re-evaluated without any reliance on Denkowski's work.

 Schneider said the decision by the Court of Appeals in the two cases would also send a signal to other judges who are reviewing cases in which Denkowski had made evaluations. He said he hoped the court would continue to reject forensic methods that had been proven unscientific.

"Their role has to be that of the supergatekeeper of forensic science," Schneider said. "They have to say we will not allow a proceeding tainted by junk science to go forward."

Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.



--------------------------------------
Sent from K. McGrew IPhone
----------------------------------
Purpose-Passion-Serendipity
-----------------------------------

Death Sentence Reviews Leave Unsettled Issues — Death Penalty | The Texas Tribune

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Atkins MR/ID Death Penalty Court Decision: Shields v US (TN, 2012)





Thanks to Kevin Foley for sending me the recent Shields v US (TN, 2012) Atkins decision. Posted without commnt.

Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Register Now for the AAIDD 2012 Conference



*If you have already registered for our annual meeting, thank you!
Please forward this email on to any interested parties.

Register Here!

Thank you to our 2012 Sponsors and Exhibitors! AAIDD's 136th Annual Meeting, Research-Practice-Policy, in Charlotte this June is the "must attend" meeting of the year. Join us for:

-4 Thrilling Special Events

-3 Enlightening Plenary Presentations

-5 In-depth Pre-conference Meetings and 8 in-depth Post Conference Meetings

-13 Important Leadership Meetings

-24 Fantastic Concurrent Sessions

-140 Interactive Poster Presentations

Unlimited networking with the top professionals in the field!

We're Looking Forward to Seeing you in Charlotte!


Forward this message to a friend

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Some press for the blog master :)

Interview at Careers in Psychology site.



Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Sunday, May 13, 2012

Article: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads





___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Article: DSM 5 Finally Begins Its Belated and Necessary Retreat



___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Research brief: Juror's judgments of confession evidence for juveniles with intellectual disabilities




Click on image to enlarge

Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

The legacy of Dr. Death and voodoo psychometrics in TX: Three remands for Atkins trial courts




The mess caused by voodoo psychometrics in select cases involving Dr. Denkowsi (sometimes called "Dr. Death") in Texas has resulted in remands for trial courts to reconsider the findings.

I just learned of the following three remands.

Maldonado (2012)

Hunter (2012)

Wesbrook(2012)






Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Monday, April 30, 2012

IAP AP101 Report # 13: Problems with the 1960 and 1986 Stanford-Binet IQ Scores in Atkins MR/ID Death Penalty Cases




Often in Atkins MR/ID death penalty cases historical and contemporary IQ scores are available for review by psychological experts.  In many cases these scores vary markedly.  The courts frequently wrestle with the issue of determining what the best estimate is of the person’s general intelligence.  A review of many Atkins cases often reveals frequent mention of two “gold standard” IQ tests in reports or testimony—namely, the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler series.

The purpose of this working paper is to alert psychologists and the courts to two little known (but extremely important) dents in the gold standard status of two versions of the Stanford-Binet—the 1960 SB and the 1986 SB IV. If a Flynn effect adjustment is made to scores from a 1960 SB, the norm date used to calculate the magnitude of the Flynn effect should be 1932…not 1960.  If SB IV scores exist in an individual’s records, experts providing opinions regarding the individual’s general level of intelligence should consider: (a) eliminating the score from consideration, (b) not give the score great weight in formulating an opinion, or (c) at a minimum, provide qualifying statements regarding the validity of the SB IV score as required by the Joint Test Standards.

IAP Applied Psychometrics 101 Report # 13 can be downloaded by clicking here.

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Atkins MR/ID death penalty decisions: Bies; Murphy; Sosa; Fults: Moormann




Five recent Atkins decisions. I have fallen way behind and need to post these all at once to clear my in box

Bies v Bagley (OH; 2012)

Sosa v Texas (TX; 2012)

Murphy v Oklahoma (2012). Prior 2002 decision here.

Fults v Upton (GA, 2012)

Moormann v Scriro (AZ, 2012)



Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Friday, April 27, 2012

Article: New form of intellectual disability discovered


New form of intellectual disability discovered
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120427100111.htm

(Sent from Flipboard)


___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Thursday, April 26, 2012

SCOTUS petition of the day: Herring v Florida re standard error of measurement (SEM)

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/petition-of-the-day-279/


___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
www.themindhub.com
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Law Review Article: Can Section 1983 Help To Prevent the Execution of Mentally Retarded Prisoners?




Link to above named article here.



Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
www.themindhub.com

Article: Ranking forensic journals through content analysis





___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Test post

--------------------------------------
Sent from Kevin McGrew IPhone
-------------------------------------
www.themindhub.com
Purpose-Passion-Serendipity
-------------------------------------

Saturday, April 21, 2012

My blogs were recently hacked...working on the problem

Two of my three professional blogs were hacked a couple of years ago. I reset the passwords and things were find. During the past few months they were hacked again, especially during the past few weeks. I have again resent my password and login to stronger settings to stop this. Thanks to the readers who have contacted me to notify me of these hacks. The content of some of these posts has been offensive and are not from me. I will remain as vigilant as possible, but the help of my readers is most welcome. In fact, emails from readers telling me that a post was made that looks inappropriate is usually how I first learn of the new hack attack. If this continues I will contact Blogger to see what other security measures might be necessary. Thank you for your understanding and assistance.

Friday, April 20, 2012

Article: Crime and punishment: Neurobiological roots of modern justice


Crime and punishment: Neurobiological roots of modern justice
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120418135350.htm

(Sent from Flipboard)


___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

FYI: National Research Council Concludes Deterrence Studies Should Not Influence Death Penalty Policy | Death Penalty Information Center

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-national-research-council-concludes-deterrence-studies-should-not-influence-death-penalty


___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
www.themindhub.com
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Monday, April 16, 2012

Article: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads



___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Article: Sklansky on Evidentiary Instructions and the Jury as Other



___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Article: SCOTUS to tackle capital habeas competency right



___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Jonah Lehrer on Memory, Witnesses and Crime | Head Case

I saw this article when reading leading brains on the Paper.li Mobile Edition and thought you might be interested:

Jonah Lehrer on Memory, Witnesses and Crime | Head Case

Getty Images Memories aren't snapshots. They're deeply flawed reconstructions. The biggest lie of human memory is that it feels true. Although our recollections seem like literal snapshots of the p...
Read the full article on online.wsj.com


___________________________
Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
___________________________
The MindHub (TM)
Purpose, Passion & Serendipity
___________________________

Monday, April 2, 2012

CHC theory and the Wechsler IQ scales and test development and interpretation

In 1998 Dr. Dawn Flanagan and I published the Intelligence Test Desk Reference book which was the first thorough treatment of CHC theory (then called Extended Gf-Gc theory). This book is now out-of-print.




We then took the concepts from the ITDR and, together with Dr. Sam Ortiz, presented a cross-battery approach to interpreting the Wechsler batteries.




And again, this book is no longer in print. This also means we no longer receive any $ for sales (conflict of interest disclosure). Table of contents for first three chapters below (click on images to enlarge)






The research, theory, and conceptual material in the second book is nearly identical to the first, but it was presented in the context of how to upgrade interpretation and understanding of the Wechsler batteries according to the CHC framework. Since then the same CHC overview material has been tweaked and updated in a series of CHC cross-battery books by Flanagan et al. But, the foundation of CHC theory, and how it can be integrated within a conceptual framework of test development and interpretation, is largely the same in these newer CHC cross-battery books.

Thus, given that these "mother and father" books are no longer in print, I took the liberty of copying the first three chapters of the Wechsler oriented book and am now making them available for my readers (click here). I make this material available to provide psychologists who have not done much reading regarding CHC theory an opportunity to have access to the basic foundation of CHC theory to help them see how it can be applied to the interpretation of an intelligence battery (in this case the Wechslers). By choosing the Wechsler material this also helps understand how the Wechsler batteries are evolving (either implicitly or explicitly--see Keith and Reynolds, 2010) when viewed from the lens of CHC theory.

But, one must recognize that this material is a bit dated. An update of CHC theory was later published in 2005 (click here to access...plus some other chapters), and was again updated this year by Schneider and McGrew (click here).

However, the CHC chapter I provide in this blog post, particularly when placed in the context of the Wechsler batteries, provides a solid foundation for understanding CHC theory and its impact on contemporary intelligence test development and interpretation. My goal is to increase awareness of CHC theory and its relevance to psychological assessment and interpretation. My goal is to spur others to become more current re: this now dominant framework in the field of applied IQ testing.


- Posted using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad

Sunday, April 1, 2012