[Enigma.]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
I heard it's 1 in 4 people over the course of their lives...not every single person will suffer from mental illness.

It's estimated 1 in 4 people will experience a form of mental illness over any one year.

Its hard to define how many people are mentally ill, because peoples lives are always changing.

Its a different number at any one time.

But most people will at some point in their lives be in a mindset due to whatever reason that would classify them as mentally ill.

[Aspiringlawstudent]

(Original post by NYU2012)
Don't pretend that psychology isn't useful.

You're a law student -- you should know better.

Especially as a law student you should be very familiar with forensic psychology; and should have a sufficient working knowledge of social psychology.

Why?

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
Why?

If you even have to ask, you're missing some very important things.

Let's give some very basic examples: (Of course, both of these contain known phenomena that occur in psychology: Do you know what they are?)


(1) Your client comes in - they're a police officer being charger with misconduct.
Basic details: The officer was chasing suspect A down a wooded trail in park, right past a particular location where suspect B was being beaten by another group of officers. The officer is being charged with misconduct because the prosecution believes he witnessed the assault and is withholding the names of his fellow officers which beat suspect B. The officer claims he didn't see anything.

Would you even know where to start?

(2) Your client comes in and tells you that they're being charged with wrongfully causing an accident due to failure to stop at a traffic stop. Your client tells you that they did stop at the traffic sign and did not cause the accident. There is a witness to the incident. The officer who took the report wrote the following "I asked the witness how fast the car was going when it went through the traffic stop. They said it was going about 20kph"

What's wrong with this situation?

We can keep going.... But these are just very basic examples.

I've actually worked in the legal field, knowing psychology as a lawyer can prove very helpful.

[Aspiringlawstudent]

(Original post by NYU2012)
If you even have to ask, you're missing some very important things.

Let's give some very basic examples: (Of course, both of these contain known phenomena that occur in psychology: Do you know what they are?)


(1) Your client comes in - they're a police officer being charger with misconduct.
Basic details: The officer was chasing suspect A down a wooded trail in park, right past a particular location where suspect B was being beaten by another group of officers. The officer is being charged with misconduct because the prosecution believes he witnessed the assault and is withholding the names of his fellow officers which beat suspect B. The officer claims he didn't see anything.

Would you even know where to start?

(2) Your client comes in and tells you that they're being charged with wrongfully causing an accident due to failure to stop at a traffic stop. Your client tells you that they did stop at the traffic sign and did not cause the accident. There is a witness to the incident. The officer who took the report wrote the following "I asked the witness how fast the car was going when it went through the traffic stop. They said it was going about 20kph"

What's wrong with this situation?

We can keep going.... But these are just very basic examples.

I've actually worked in the legal field, knowing psychology as a lawyer can prove very helpful.

Why the assumption I'm going to have anything to do with the criminal law, for a start?

And secondly, I don't see how psychology is helpful here. It doesn't change the law, nor does it change evidence.

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
Why the assumption I'm going to have anything to do with the criminal law, for a start?

Those were merely examples -- it's helpful in many aspects.

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
And secondly, I don't see how psychology is helpful here. It doesn't change the law, nor does it change evidence.

Then you make a very poor law student, who apparently cannot make a very good argument.

(1) The officer experienced attentional blindness -- he didn't actually see anything. (Proven psychology phenomena, watch a youtube video about it)

(2) The officer asked a leading question "how fast was the car going"; not "did the car do anything at the traffic stop?". It's a leading question and can influence memory recollection. (I.e. the witness falsely remember the car going through the traffic stop when, in reality, the car actually stopped). Even you should be aware of why a leading question is bad. (Again, a proven psychological phenomena).

There are plenty of examples I could come up with where it's useful to know psychology.

Knowing only the law does not make a great lawyer. A great lawyer knows more than just the law. Psychology is not as useless as you seem to think it is, and you would do well to not discard it as "useless" when one day it could help you.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
Why the assumption I'm going to have anything to do with the criminal law, for a start?

And secondly, I don't see how psychology is helpful here. It doesn't change the law, nor does it change evidence.

how you can possibly be a law student with that mindset is beyond me.