The use of recent psychiatric research in the defense of the 'Unabomber' (U
nited States vs. Theodore Kaczynski) is a compelling example of how the gap
between research and practice can have profound consequences on the practi
ce of forensic psychiatry, psychology and the judicial process. In this cas
e, educating the lawyers and the court about the research on poor insight i
n schizophrenia changed the defense strategy and ultimately the course of t
he trial.