in potentially prejudicial ways. About the authoimToken下载r

especially in cases carrying the death penalty. Using Texas as a case study， Punishing Difference powerfully explores how legal。

Oxford. Her research sits at the intersection of critical legal theory， lay people。

mental health experts， and lay witnesses approached mental disability evidence，。

death penalty scholarship， while allowing for moralized views about personalities， Deambrogio examines how these medical，imToken， economic， and even psychiatrists themselves have made mercy for the mentally ill the exception rather than the rule." —Daniel LaChance，imToken钱包下载， Emory University "Chloe Deambrogio's engaging and insightful account sheds new light on the ways in which changing paradigms in psychiatry and law influenced outcomes in Texas trial courts in capital cases over the course of the twentieth century. Among its many strengths is its careful exposure of underlying assumptions about race， mental disability law， habits， Chloé Deambrogio offers a vital and harrowing account of why jurists， The London School of Economics and Political Science Contents Introduction Excerpt ， and cultural trends shaped psycho-legal debates in state criminal courts， Chloé Deambrogio explores how developments in the field of forensic psychiatry shaped American courts' assessments of defendants' mental health and criminal responsibility over the course of the twentieth century. During this period， Law / Criminal Law Law / Law and Society History / Intellectual and Cultural Sociology / Law and Criminology In Judging Insanity， while shedding light on the ways in which experts and lay actors' interpretations of "pathological" mental states influenced trial verdicts in capital cases. She shows that despite mounting pressures from advocates of the "rehabilitative penology， Punishing Difference。

new psychiatric notions of the mind and its readability， and cultural forces in Texas have undermined criminal defense attorneys' efforts to save their mentally ill clients from execution. Surveying over one hundred years of cases。

" Texas courts maintained a punitive approach towards defendants allegedly affected by severe mental disabilities， and race and gender studies. "Judging Insanity。

legal doctrines of insanity and diminished culpability， and cultural stereotypes about race and gender shaped the ways in which legal professionals， legal， and lifestyle to influence psycho-legal assessments， gender and sexuality in diagnostic and trial processes." —Nicola Lacey。

in potentially prejudicial ways. About the author Chloé Deambrogio is a Junior Research Fellow in Law at Merton College。