AN EVALUATION OF LEGAL OUTCOME FOLLOWING PRETRIAL FORENSIC ASSESSMENT

This paper constitutes the first stage of data analysis in a larger co ntrolled study designed to assess the effect of a forensic psychiatric assessment on legal disposition defined in three ways: 1. the number of days spent in custody prior to trial; 2. the number of sentenced da ys of incarceration; and 3. the conviction rate. A historical cohort d esign was used to follow two cohorts of individuals remanded, pretrial , to Southern Alberta Provincial Correctional Centres between 1988 and 1989. The study cohort consisted of all offenders detained who receiv ed a forensic psychiatric assessment. The comparison cohort consisted of a random sample of persons detained who did not undergo a forensic assessment. Because of small numbers, individuals below the age of 18 and women were excluded from study. This paper compares socio-legal ch aracteristics of study and comparison subjects in order to better unde rstand forensic psychiatric referral patterns and identify potentially confounding factors that would need to be controlled in subsequent an alyses of legal outcomes. No differences were noted with respect to ed ucational level but forensic subjects were found to be slightly older (average of 31 years compared to 29 years). Aboriginal peoples (Native Indian, Inuit and Metis) were three times more common among non-foren sic offenders. Forensic patients were more likely to have had a prior forensic assessment but less likely to have a prior criminal detention . In addition, forensic patients were three times more likely to be ch arged with a crime against a person and counted more offenses in the t arget episode than comparison subjects. The under-representation of Ab original peoples in the forensic cohort is discussed in light of the k nowledge that mental illnesses are over-represented among native peopl es and Aboriginal peoples are over-represented among criminal populati ons. The next phase of the analysis will compare legal outcomes contro lling for differences in age, ethnicity, prior forensic assessment, pr ior detentions and violent index crimes.