The Legal Correspondence of Sexual Self-Defense Capability Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the legal application and case deposition of assessment opinions of sexual self-defense capability, and to explore the necessity of legal correspondence in the sexual defense capability assessment. METHODS: According to the self-made questionnaire, the cases of sexual self-defense capability assessment completed by the Academy of Forensic Science from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 were statistically analyzed through telephone interviews and referrals. RESULTS: Among the 69 cases, 3 cases (4.3%) had complete sexual self-defense capability, 30 cases (43.5%) had weakened sexual self-defense capability, 32 cases (46.2%) had no sexual self-defense capability, and 4 cases (5.8%) were not suitable for assessment. Among the 30 cases with weakened sexual self-defense ability, 15 cases were filed and investigated by public security authorities for rape and 15 cases were not. The inconsistent rate of disposition was 1∶1. Among the 15 rape cases filed and investigated by the public security authorities, 10 cases were arrested and prosecuted by the procuratorate and sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment by the court, while the other 5 cases were not arrested and prosecuted by the procuratorate, with an inconsistent rate of disposition being 2∶1. CONCLUSIONS: The legal application of the assessment opinion on the weakening of sexual self-defense capability is inconsistent, and the judicial disposition is confusing. It is imperative to unify and correspond the classification of sexual self-defense capability with the legal requirements.

The reliability and validity of the rating scale of criminal responsibility for mentally disordered offenders.

In China, the criminal responsibility of the mentally disordered offenders is divided into three levels, there are the whole responsibility, diminished responsibility and irresponsibility. According to the Criminal Law, "If a mental disordered patient causes harmful consequences at a time when he is unable to recognize or control his own conduct, upon verification and confirmation through legal procedure, he shall not bear criminal responsibility." That means there are two standards of assessing criminal responsibility, namely volitional and cognitive capacity. It is as equal as the Mc'Naughton Rule and the Irresistible Impulse Test. But for a long time, the criminal responsibility was assessed mainly by experience because of lacking of standardized assessment instrument. Recently, we have developed "the rating scale of criminal responsibility for mentally disordered offenders (RSCRs)". The scale includes eighteen items, namely criminal motivation, aura before offense, inducement of crime, time and place and object and tool selectivity of crime, emotion during the crime, shirking responsibility after offense, concealing the truth during inquest, camouflage, understanding the nature of the offense, estimating the consequence of the offense, impairment of life ability, impairment of learning or work, impairment of insight, impairment of reality testing, and impairment of self-control. This scale can be applicable for all cases and easy to use. This scale had been tried out in several forensic psychiatry institutes, the Cronbach α of the scale is 0.93, and all items have high correlation with the total score of the scale (r=0.50-0.89). Two factors were extracted by the factorial analysis, and the cumulative squared loading was 68.62%. The scores of the three levels were 9.66 ± 5.11, 26.54 ± 5.21 and 40.08 ± 7.90 respectively and highly significant differences were observed among groups. By establishing discrimination analysis among three levels, classification results suggested that 88.90% of the original grouped cases were correctly classified, and the discriminant value had high conformity with the experts' opinions. The data showed that the scale would be the best validated instrument for the criminal responsibility in China.