The Missed Opportunity: How Attorneys Undervalue Forensic Psychology to Their Own Detriment
In the legal world, timing and strategy can make or break a case. Yet time and again, I see attorneys overlooking a critical tool in their arsenal: forensic psychology. Whether it’s a criminal case involving trauma, a civil case demanding proof of emotional damages, or a high-stakes personal injury suit, lawyers often wait too long—or never think—to involve a forensic psychologist.
When they don’t, they miss key opportunities to strengthen their argument, shape their strategy, and uncover the full psychological landscape of the case.
Let’s talk about what that actually looks like.
Case in Point: The Catina Curley Trial
In 2007, Catina Curley shot and killed her husband after years of brutal domestic abuse. But her original legal team failed to present psychological evidence about the impact of that abuse. She was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison.
It wasn’t until years later, when her case was revisited, that her new legal team brought me in to evaluate her. What I uncovered through psychological testing and extensive psychological interviews was consistent with the long-term effects of intimate partner violence, including complex PTSD, learned helplessness, and trauma-linked cognitive distortions. These findings were directly relevant to her perception of threat at the time of the shooting.
Had that evaluation been done at the outset, the outcome of her trial could have been very different. In the end, the psychological evidence contributed to her conviction being overturned, but only after she had spent nearly a decade in prison.
This kind of oversight is not unique. I’ve seen the same thing happen across dozens of cases, in both criminal and civil courtrooms.
Criminal Cases: More Than Competency and Sanity
Too often, attorneys only bring in forensic psychologists to assess for competency or sanity. While those evaluations are critical, they barely scratch the surface of what we can offer.
In criminal defense, a forensic psychologist can:
Conduct assessments in cases involving self-defense or diminished capacity
Develop mitigation reports based on developmental, neurological, or psychiatric vulnerabilities
Evaluate the effects of childhood abuse, neurodevelopmental issues, or untreated mental illness
Explain behaviors that might appear cold, robotic, or odd to a jury but are actually trauma-related responses
These insights often don’t just support the case — they can change the narrative entirely.
Civil Cases: Emotional Damages Require More Than a Diagnosis
In emotional damages litigation, attorneys sometimes rely on treating therapists or general clinicians to explain the plaintiff’s distress. But there is a big difference between a therapy progress note and a forensic report designed for legal scrutiny. Treating providers are not objective experts, and their documentation is typically intended for healing, not litigation.
Forensic psychologists are trained to evaluate causation, credibility, and impact with the rigor the courtroom demands. I wrote more extensively about this distinction in another post, De Facto Expert vs. Objective Evaluating Expert: The Role of Forensic Psychologists in Court.
A treating therapist might say, “My client is anxious and depressed.” A forensic psychologist can say:
The individual meets criteria for PTSD directly tied to the defendant’s actions
Their functioning has declined significantly from baseline based on standardized testing
The symptoms are not better explained by preexisting conditions, based on a thorough review of history and collateral records
That level of precision can make the difference between a claim that feels vague and one that is legally persuasive. It doesn’t just tell the story — it quantifies the impact.
Civil Defense: Don’t Take Claims at Face Value
On the defense side, attorneys often fail to request evaluations of plaintiffs making emotional damages claims. This is a major missed opportunity.
Just because someone alleges psychological harm doesn’t mean the symptoms are linked to the event in question, or even that the symptoms are clinically valid. A defense evaluation can explore:
Alternative causes for symptoms, such as personality factors or unrelated stressors
Potential exaggeration or malingering, using validated symptom validity testing
The actual level of functional impairment, which is often less than claimed
Having a forensic expert on your side means the plaintiff’s psychological claims don’t go unchallenged.
Profiling the Gaps: When the Data Are Missing
Many cases involve questions of behavior and mental state that go far beyond the scope of what treating professionals can assess. Unfortunately, forensic psychologists are often called in too late to explore these questions meaningfully.
In some instances, an attorney doesn’t realize the value of a psychological evaluation until shortly before trial or sentencing. By then, the chance to shape the narrative has passed. A rushed referral limits the depth and quality of what can be offered.
When we are brought in early, we can analyze records, identify gaps, and guide discovery. We can even help frame early depositions or prepare focused cross-examination strategies based on behavioral science.
Final Thoughts: Don’t Wait Until You Are Backed Into a Corner
Forensic psychologists bring more than a diagnosis. We bring clarity, context, and credibility.
Whether it’s a battered woman charged with murder, a plaintiff claiming emotional damages, or a civil defendant facing inflated claims, forensic input can make a measurable difference. And the earlier we’re involved, the better the outcome tends to be.
The legal system doesn’t run on hunches — it runs on evidence. Don’t overlook the expert who can uncover the psychological truth of your case.
