A Real-World View of Incompetence to Stand Trial

In part 1 of this two-part series, we looked at the recent murder charges handed down to Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow, as well as the outrage that followed a psychologist’s conclusion after evaluating her that Lori Vallow is incompetent to stand trial. Initially, the prosecutor said he was challenging this opinion. A hearing was scheduled and a second opinion was expected.

Suddenly, however, the prosecutor did an about-face, saying he would no longer challenge the psychologist’s finding, sparking additional concern that Lori might escape the consequences of her actions. It also sparked a new round of anger and blame, particularly on social media. Her defense attorneys were accused of deviousness, the psychologist of being hoodwinked, and the prosecution and judge of being either weak, ignorant, or incompetent.

Here’s a forensic psychologist ‘s perspective on what this latest turn of events really means.

Don’t Believe the Hype

There’s nothing inherently manipulative or devious about questioning your client’s competency. It happens in eight to 15 percent of criminal cases. In fact, competency to stand trial evaluations are the most frequently performed type of forensic assessment; about 60,000 are performed every year. Between 20 and 30 percent result in an incompetency…