Dangerousness Risk Assessment of Defendant Donald J. Trump

Live Session Today at 2 p.m. EDT—Zoom Link

[Please see far below for the live session Zoom link for this afternoon.]

The most eminent living psychiatrists in existence have assembled in a panel to give their recommendations to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, for Donald Trump’s sentencing on July 11, 2024.  Generally, the purpose of a pre-sentencing report or evaluation is to provide information that can help the court to determine the degree to which a person convicted of breaking a law or laws, especially if they are crimes that rise to the level of felonies, presents a risk of repeating the same or similar crimes—and, worse, of committing even more serious felony crimes.

A forensic psychiatrist or psychologist may first begin by evaluating how serious the crimes were that a particular convicted criminal committed.  For example, the crimes that Donald Trump committed may lexically appear to be the same as something relatively harmless—so-called “white lies” or “white collar” misdemeanors, cheating people of a few dollars, etc.—or could indicate deliberately and systematically attempting to subvert and suspend the Constitution of the United States and the rule of law, and to replace our democracy with a dictatorship.

Indeed, the crimes committed to steal the presidential election by concealing his tawdry sex life, on the heels of his own declaration of his practice of grabbing female genitalia at will, resulted in the most massive theft.  His stealing the presidency resulted in stacking the Supreme Court and many other federal appointments with persons chosen by his wealthy contributors and other ideologues, as well as his personal enrichment by using his office to further his own business interests.  He threatened our very Constitution.

Therefore, the lies and deceptions that the defendant committed did not consist merely of concealing the purpose of checks that he signed.  They were as serious as any crimes that have ever been committed in the history of our country: namely, an attempt to destroy our democracy and replace it with a dictatorship.

We therefore intend to recommend that:

… the only way to protect our democracy, and the legal and electoral structure without which it will cease to exist, from the defendant’s attempt to destroy it—the crime of which he has just been convicted—is to restrain him by any means that the laws of sentencing permit: up to and including incarceration, for as long as those laws permit.  Anything less than that would be insufficient to protect our nation, and indeed the entire world, from criminal behavior on a scale that we have never seen before in our history, committed by a man who is totally unrepentant and uninhibited about doing so.

Standardized, evidence-based violence risk assessment tools agree with our assessment.  The defendant scored 8 (from a score range of -26 to +38) on the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide–Revised (VRAG-R) and 35 (prorated at 36, from a maximum score of 40) on the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R).  These scores indicate a significant need for specific deterrence (even without consideration of general deterrence, which the VRAG-R does not measure) and a full diagnosis of psychopathy, which is highly predictive of violence.  A diagnosis of mass murderers and serial rapists, psychopathy means that he is capable of mass atrocities, without limit.  Early containment of this tendency will help curb escalations of future violence.  Also important factors are his denial of guilt, his lack of remorse, his contempt of court by threatening and inciting violence against judge, jury, and prosecutors, and his use of this criminal conviction to attack the justice system and the rule of law in general.

In the words of Michel Foucault, a philosopher who wrote Discipline and Punish (originally published in French in 1975): “How can one link absolutely in the minds of men the idea of crime and the idea of punishment, if the reality of the punishment does not follow, in all cases, the reality of the offense?… One must punish enough to prevent repetition.”  It should not be overlooked that he still has pending cases of election fraud, conspiracy against the government, and theft of classified documents that has endangered national security.  It is also notable that he has been adjudicated to be guilty of sexual assault, likely rape.

And of the two types of deterrence for felonies – specific and general – general deterrence is of great significance, because of Donald Trump’s conduct and how vigorously his more than 74 million followers echo his message.  Therefore, the sentence should not only be sufficient for specific deterrence but also for general deterrence.

…

The United States requires all high-ranking military officers to submit to an annual fitness-for duty evaluation including full medical and psychiatric examinations.  Unfortunately, this rule does not apply specifically to the Commander in Chief.  In determining an appropriate sentence for the former president, the Court has a unique opportunity to protect public safety and national security by requiring him to undergo a comprehensive evaluation of his mental status and dangerousness by an impartial panel of experts.  A comprehensive evaluation of his mental status should be mandatory, as will a complete physical examination including brain imaging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).  We understand that he may be hospitalized for this purpose, in a designated facility for up to thirty days.  Once complete, the results are to be provided to an impartial panel of experts, who will monitor his progress and evaluate his dangerousness.

Announcement:

Dr. Bandy X. Lee is inviting you to a live session of “What Would You Put in a Risk Assessment?”:

Time: Jun 15, 2024 02:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting

https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89972111484?pwd=Rrx6Is5D10gX8jJAVplrcvL59qV937.1

Meeting ID: 899 7211 1484

Passcode: 220236

Dr. Lee is a forensic psychiatrist, social psychiatrist, and expert on violence. She helped form an expert panel of eminent psychiatrists, who will offer recommendations for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, along with a press release and opinion articles prior to his sentencing. We would love to hear your input: what would you put in the risk assessment? What could we do to help stop this dangerous and unfit former president? Please join us in the conversation!