Testifying in capital murder cases is one of the most demanding roles we can assume as forensic psychologists. In these proceedings, assessment findings are not a supporting detail in the record. They can be central to whether a defendant receives a life sentence or a death sentence, and they may be used to shape the court's understanding of moral culpability, mitigation, and the need for specific deterrence. In other words, our work is often invited into the most consequential part of the case: the decision about how a person should be punished, and whether the state will take their life.
Unlike many criminal cases, capital litigation is designed for a long life. A report that reads cleanly in the moment may be re-read years later in post-conviction proceedings by people who were not present at trial and who are explicitly tasked with identifying weakness, overreach, or error. That reality changes the standard we should hold ourselves to. Defensibility is not just about “winning” cross-examination; it’s about whether our reasoning remains transparent and bounded when the case is revisited after the emotional intensity of trial has faded.