The Courtroom Psychologist:
A Blog
Archives
- June 2024
- July 2024
- August 2024
- September 2024
- October 2024
- November 2024
- December 2024
- January 2025
- February 2025
- March 2025
- April 2025
-
May 2025
- May 1, 2025 Not Everyone You Dislike Is a Narcissist: The Misuse of Labels in the Courtroom
- May 1, 2025 Too Smart to Be Intellectually Disabled? Why Crime Scene Behavior Shouldn’t Determine Adaptive Functioning
- May 2, 2025 More Than the Crime Scene: How Forensic Psychology Informs Mitigation and Aggravation in Sentencing
- June 2025

De Facto Expert vs. Objective Evaluating Expert: The Role of Forensic Psychologists in Court
In legal cases, it is crucial to distinguish between treatment providers and forensic psychologists when seeking expert testimony. Treatment providers, such as therapists, have a subjective, supportive relationship with their patients, which can skew their opinions when testifying on psychological matters outside the scope of their treatment. In contrast, forensic psychologists are objective evaluators who conduct comprehensive assessments, using data from tests, records, and collateral interviews. Their training allows them to provide neutral, evidence-based opinions in court, making them better suited for expert testimony. Attorneys must recognize this difference to ensure unbiased, reliable testimony in legal proceedings.