Perícia psiquiátrica criminal : quando os juízes concordam ou discordam

• Autor(a) principal: Teixeira, Eduardo Henrique
• Data de Publicação: 2005
• Outros Autores: Dalgalarrondo, Paulo, 1960-
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório da Produção Científica e Intelectual da Unicamp
• Texto Completo: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12733/1647431
• topic: Psiquiatria forense; Forensic psychiatry; Defesa por insanidade; Laudo pericial; Discordância; Artigo original

The current paper assesses the agreement rates between the outcome of psychiatric expert opinion and the final judicial sentence and reports two typical cases, one of agreement and the other of disagreement between judges and forensic psychiatrists. All verdicts involving forensic psychiatric evaluations in circuit courts of Campinas (SP) in the year 2002 were studied. For the year 2002, from a total of 133 criminal trials that had psychiatrical evaluation in that year, 41 verdicts were studied according to its socio-demographic characteristics, clinical data, and type of crime and possibility of imputation. A high rate of agreement was observed between legal capacity and judicial sentence, a result similar to that found in the literature. From this preliminary study it is possible to conclude that judges in the Brazilian social, cultural and legal context seem to agree completely with the assessments and conclusions reached by forensic psychiatrists in criminal forensic cases. High-profile or very severe cases appear to be exceptions to this rule. Studies with larger samples and from different regions in Brazil must be performed in order to verify whether this data is valid on a national level