Topical Blog Due Tuesday 2/14 @ midnight

I’d like to start out by saying that this was a very enjoyable film. This was the first time that I had watched Primal Fear (1996) and I didn’t really know what to expect. It was very convenient because it was streaming on Netflix. Another thing that I loved about this movie was the fact that Aaron was played by Ed Norton, who is the same actor in the movie Fight Club. In Fight Club, Norton plays a similar role as a delusional individual. For students interested in Psychology or Law, or both, Primal Fear is a movie that I would definitely recommend. Psychology plays into this film more this film in more than a few ways.
One part of the movie that I believe deserves some attention because of the psychological aspects involved is when attorney Martin Vail is with Aaron in his jail cell and they are discussing how Aaron needs to look during the trial. This is a topic that we discussed recently in class; defendants who look mean usually get prosecuted more. Martin Vail wanted to play on this because his defendant looks so boyish and innocent. There’s even a scene where the prosecutor says to Vail, “Oh, he has the perfect face!” This is because psychologically we unconsciously judge people by the way that they appear. Martin Vail tells Aaron, “Yes, that’s the face right there that I want!” This is because if the jury thinks that he LOOKS innocent, there’s a better chance of him getting a Not Guilty. This happens also at the beginning of the movie when they first meet and Vail asks Aaron what size suit he wears. He asks him this because he wants Aaron to look professional. Unfortunately, in our culture looks are pretty important. You can argue as much as you want, but at the end of the day, the way that someone looks is fairly important. Of course, you wouldn’t want to marry someone for the sole reason that they are attractive, but at the same time, attraction begins with looks.

The most obvious form of psychology relevant to this film is Clinical Psychology. It is clear to everyone that Aaron is suffering from a mental disorder. (Well, not really clear to the prosecution until the end.) Aaron suffers from dissociative identity disorder, or better known as Multiple Personality Disorder. This was probably one of the most interesting parts of the movie for me because of the fact that I have taken Abnormal Psychology and I am now the T.A. for the course. Dissociative Identity Disorder is by far one of the most controversial mental disorders in the DSM IV. The reason for this is that many psychologists believe that it is actually a fake disorder. There are plenty of logical reasons why there are people who don’t believe that this is a real disorder. Let’s take a look at the statistics behind the disorder: After there is a publication of some sort involving Dissociative Identity Disorder, the rates of diagnoses skyrocket. For example, after the movie Sybill came out, the number of Dissociative Identity Disorder cases went from less than 100 to thousands. Another reason that some believe Dissociative Identity Disorder to be fake, is that many believe that therapists can actually create the different identities in the client’s head by being suggestive. If Dissociative Identity disorder were to be fake, the “sufferers” of this fake disorder might actually be suffering from another personality disorder: histrionic personality disorder. This is when one acts very dramatic in order to receive attention.

The end of the movie was very confusing to me at first. For a second, I thought that he may have been faking the disorder the whole time. I believe that Martin Vail thought this too. Right when I thought that he had been faking it, is when the audience realizes that Roy is talking, not Aaron. This could mean a few different things. This could mean that Roy is actually Aaron, and he created Aaron consciously in order to fool the jury; or this could mean that he did in fact have the disorder, but in the last scene he was simply Roy at the time and not Aaron (explaining his rude behavior to Martin Vail). It’s a bit confusing because he would have had to have been Roy at the time because Aaron wouldn’t have known that he attacked the prosecutor.

I retrieved some of the information regarding Dissociative Identity Disorder from the following sites:

http://girlshrink.com/the-controversy-over-dissociative-identity-disorder/

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/dissociative-identity-disorder-multiple-personality-disorder?page=3

I really enjoyed Primal Fear and thought it was an interesting depiction of the inner workings of parts of our criminal justice system. There were many intersections with different forms of psychology which sometimes included depictions that probably weren’t very accurate.

The first things I noticed about this movie that had a major link to psychology were the crime scene and the nature of the murder itself. I think this part, along with many others in the movie, have to do a lot with both criminal psychology and social psychology. Both relate because the state that the victim was left it-- having had his fingers cut off, eyes gouged out, mutilation, and multiple stab wounds-- all indicate that this was probably a very personal crime. In trying to determine motive and intent, it is important to try to look into the mind of the killer to understand what he/she was thinking. This part is more related to the criminal psychology, but everything leading up to the crime would be related to social psychology. Aaron had a fairly complex relationship with the archbishop and obviously felt as though he had been wronged in many ways, thus leading him to commit the murder. All of these interactions between Aaron, Linda, the other altar boys, and the archbishop laid the groundwork for what was to come along later. Since we only saw a little bit of this link to psychology actually brought up during the movie (by the prosecutor), it wasn’t really depicted that well.

Another way social psychology comes into play is both through the trial itself and the media’s depiction of the trial. Throughout the movie, Martin emphasizes various times to Aaron the importance of his behavior in the courtroom. He gets Aaron a suit, tells him not to speak, and works on getting down the right ‘face’ for trial. As we recently talked about in class, this is very important because appearance can have a big effect on the jury, whether or not they consciously realize it. The thoughts and feelings of the jury are constantly being influenced by Aaron’s actions, mannerisms, and expressions. From the very beginning, the media referred to Aaron as the “Butcher Boy.” Undoubtedly, most everyone probably thought that he was guilty. With the gruesomeness of the crime along with the manner in which he was captured and tons of incriminating evidence, many people probably wouldn’t have any doubts that he did. They would likely be willing to publicly condemn him for his actions. All of this media coverage would probably make it difficult to go through jury selection and find people who weren’t significantly influenced by the beliefs they have already come to construct. As talked about in the book and lecture, potential jury members are asked a series of questions to determine whether or not, and if so how much bias they have towards the case. In a situation like this, it could easily take days simply to find a jury who will try to hear the case with an open mind. I think the time frame that it would take for the entire case to come together, along with jury selection and actually setting a time for the trial proceeded way too quickly and was not depicted accurately, however since it is only a movie it makes sense that it had to move quickly to advance the plot.

Clinical psychology is another very big part of this movie. Since before the trial started, Martin sought out a psychiatric evaluation for Aaron, although he didn’t receive it until partway through the trial. From the beginning, I thought that there was something going on with Aaron, whether it was a lack of mental capacity or an actual disorder. I think the depiction of Aaron being taped during the interview with the psychiatrist was quite accurate. I also think that the way she asked her questions to make him comfortable at first and later try to dig into the core of his issues was also fairly accurate. I also thought that the process by which Martin and the psychiatrist came to discover that Aaron has dissociative identity disorder was fairly realistic (if you are one who believes that the disorder exists, that is). I say that this seems well depicted because Roy only came out when Aaron was triggered by anger or was being forced to remember things that he had been attempting to repress. Everything that was going on with Aaron/Roy seemed to make sense when put into the context of DID-- the blackouts, the history of abuse, and the stark changes in personality when becoming Roy. What I found to be very unrealistic about all of this was that in the end, the “Roy” personality was Aaron’s true personality and Aaron’s demeanor was simply made it as a defense. I think it is extremely unlikely that an individual would be able to carry out this intense of scheme without faltering somewhere along the way, and probably fairly early on. Since Aaron’s true self wasn’t discovered until the very end of the movie after a mistrial was declared, I can’t say that it was similar to what might happen in real life. The fact that Aaron was actually acting/faking the DID, however, has likely happened in past.

Overall, I thought this was a very good movie, regardless of the parts that weren't very realistic. It kept me guessing until the end and was a fun, less common depiction of what lengths people may go to in order to get out of punishment.

This was my first time watching this film, and I thought that it was very good. The ending was definitely a huge surprise but I think it made the film more interesting especially from a psychological standpoint.

There are many ways in which things we have discussed in class fit into this film. The first think I noticed was the procedures followed by criminal investigators when analyzing the crime scene. Although they didn’t show a large portion of this process, I don’t think it was represented correctly. I didn’t get the feeling they were being very careful with the evidence and the investigators rolled the body over before pictures of the crime scene could be taken. Also later in the film I found it surprising that Martin Veil could easily take evidence from the crime scene. I would hope that in real life a crime scene under trial would be better protected and surveyed.

Of course another obvious use of psychology in this movie was the presence of a neural psychologist. Martin did not want the typical psychologist that often testified in court so he chose a neural psychologist who could interview Aaron on numerous occasions. He didn’t want to know necessarily if Aaron was insane, he wanted to know if Aaron was capable of committing this crime. However as we know they were let to believe he really was insane.

This leads me to my final point. When the neural psychologist discovered that Aaron was showing signs of multiple personality disorder they believed that Aaron really didn’t do it, because it was his alter ego Roy that killed the bishop. In class we have talked a little about the use of an insanity plea in a trial. Most people do not get off on an insanity plea and in the movie the neural psychologist even mentioned that proving this in court was unlikely. As we know however, you can prove it in court especially when the defendant shows signs of insanity while under oath. The ending of this story also exemplifies why insanity pleas are hard to prove which is because people can easily fake being insane in order to get off easy.

The most interesting part of this movie was probably the scene where the psychologist was testifying. This demonstrates how skeptical people are when people plea insanity and how lawyers will simply try to demonstrate the incompetence of a psychologist in an effort to disprove their testimony. If I were a juror I personally am not sure what I would believe, I would hope that the psychologist knew what they were talking about. Since I am applying for law school, I also found the whole trial process interesting. This film really emphasized the right of any defendant to have a fair trial. I actually respected Martin for doing his best to provide that for Aaron.

Psychology played a large role in this movie in many different ways. Three most prevalent ways are through clinical psychology, developmental psychology and criminal psychology.
One prominent scene that psychology intertwined with law was when they interviewed Roy with the video camera. In this particular setting, clinical psychology was heavily used. The psychologist tries to establish Roy’s mental stability and capabilities. Her questions are directed to extract answers in order to determine his abilities. She would ask questions about his history and life—specifically his girlfriend. Questions about his girlfriend triggered his other personality and gathered a response from him. Later on, Martin was brought into the picture. Martin used tactics to instigate Roy’s “second personality.” He was attempting to make Roy angry enough to tell the truth; however, he was in for a surprise to find that Roy had a second personality. This psychological discovery is an important step to take in a case. A person’s well-being is greatly influenced by a decision if they are insane or not. If one is insane, they need the help that a facility can provide for them whereas a prison sentence would hinder one’s well-being. His sentence is also at stake in this situation. If he really does have multiple personality disorder, his legal charges of life in person, or the death sentence, could become a placement in an institution for the insane. I don’t think the movie depicted the importance and prevalence of his multiple personality disorder as much as it should have. It is discussed in a few scene, but I feel like it is of much greater importance that shown in the movie. We also didn’t view different states in order for us to establish a good decision about his diagnosis.
Developmental psychology is also prevalent in this movie. Many instances they discussed Roy’s childhood and the abuse he suffered. Because he suffered from abuse when he was younger, the attorneys were able to use that factor in their cases. It became a reason and a sign that he really committed the murder. Many research studies have shown that childhood trauma can lead to people’s actions in the future. In turn, psychologists are able to establish that he has a multiple personality disorder because that is one of the signs that lead to deviance as an adult.
Another way psychology played into this movie was through criminal psychology. At the beginning of the movie, they dissected the crime scene and try to establish a person that would commit such a heinous crime. They work to find out the criminal’s motive and mental stability due to the carvings and slaying of the body. The prosecution evidence presented to them to determine that Roy did it such as the bloody shoe prints and Roy fleeing from the scene. However, Martin tried to decipher the thoughts, and possible will power it would take for someone to committee that crime and applying that to determine if Roy could have committee it.
The thing I found most interesting was the breakdown of the case and determining if Roy could have committed the crime. I was very intrigued at learning the connections that pulled together the case. It was interesting to see them establish that Roy had a personality disorder. At first, we didn’t see it, and then slowly “Roy” starts to evolve. Gradually, they pick up clues that they use to link him to the personality disorder, when in reality, they don’t relate at all. For instance, Roy’s childhood was a large issue. They used it to say that because he experienced that as a child, it reinforces that he has a personality disorder. It was very interesting to hear both sides in the court room.

After watching the movie Primal Fear I think one of the most important points in the movie was also the best intersection of psychology and law. The point of the movie that Im talking about is the trial. After the have caught Aaron, seen the tape, and the psychologist and Richard Gere have seen Roy. After this point in the movie Richard Gere's character realizes that he cant change his plea, but he can make the jury change there view of the case. This is because he wants the jury to have doubt in their mind that Aaron did this horrific crime. Thats why Gere's character puts the psychologist on the stand before he puts Aaron on the stand. This has extreme points of psychology in this scene. Gere is making sympathy for the defendent, and he is doing this with forms of abnormal psychology. This scene also has the social psychology perspective as well because he puts all of these witnesses on the stand in a certain way so that this might influence the jury on their opinion of the defendent. If Gere's character did this he would have to know how each person would react to seeing and hearing what they were about to see. He would have to know this to get the jury on his side. I have not seen a real court hearing before, and Im always surprized on how the court system is a lot different from how they portray it in movies or television shows. So I would say that it probly wasnt portrain accurately. I say this because the trail was so quick and things that I have learned in class on procedures on crime scene to background checks on people they would have need more time. The point in the movie that was the most interesting for me was the scene after Roy comes out in the court room and Gere's character has won the case, and he going to go talk with Aaron. He find out that is way all an act. That there is no Aaron, he killed Linda, and that he knowingly killed the Arch Bishop. This is my favorite part of the movie because Gere's character says in the movie that he does it, being a criminal attorney, because he believe that everybody is innocent until proven guilty. So then in this scene he knows he just let a guilty man walk free. Gere's character finally realizes that some people are guilty, and he just let a murder go free. This was a powerful scene in my opinion.

Primal Fear is a truley interesting take on a case that involves a lot of psychological aspects. The defendant, Edward Norton, is caught in a legal battle for his life as the defense struggles to unveil the psychological disorder that troubles the defendant. The defense attorney, Richard Gere, has a primary role in interpreting the legal implications that result from the defendant's unusual condition. Two of the aspects in this movie that really highlight the relationship between law and psychology I would like to focus on include the psychological evaluation performed on the defendant, and how the testimony and cross examination in the final days of the hearing involved psychology.

It becomes fairly clear after Aaron was detained that something didn't fit in this case where such a gruesome murder occurred. On the surface Aaron appears to be a harmless, slightly abused youth. His inherent studder shines some light on the possibility that he might be struggling with some issues. However, these issues are not completely revealed until the psychological expert comes in to do an evaluation. After discussing Aaron's girlfriend Linda, Aaron becomes violent and hostile toward the psychologist. This new behavior is also accompanied by an alternate personality. This and a scary moment with his attorney prove to both the psychologist and the defense that they're dealing with an individual who suffers from multiple personality disorder.

The psychological evaluation was key in this case for a couple reasons. First off, the defense used the fact that the defendant needed a psychological evaluation before releasing a plea. This was important because it prevented Aaron from possibly incriminating himself at the beginning at the trial. Additionally, the evaluation also led to the discovery of Aaron's psychological condition. This discovery is imperative to linking the defendant's mental state to the case. The evaluation also reveals some inherent issues that Aaron has dealt with such as physical abuse suffered at the hands of his father, and sexual abuse that is discovered in the video tape evidence. Psychological evaluation is crucial in cases such as this, and evidence discovered through evaluations can be important to the main components of a case.

The courtroom proceedings were another area in which the movie demonstrated the relationship between psychology and law. The two main instances include the testimony given by the psychologist and the cross examination of Aaron/Roy. The expert testimony was not even technically supposed to be a main component of the case, which is partially the reason the judge strikes the testimony from the case. However, the expert testimony introduces the fact that Aaron suffers from multiple personality disorder. Furthermore, because of this disorder it would have been possible for Aaron to commit the crime and have no recollection or awareness of the entire event. Dr. Maclin serves as an expert witness very often, and I believe the deposition given in the movie is fairly accurate to the format of real life trial procedure.

The other scene that I want to shed some focus on is the cross examination of Aaron. In the cross examination Marty is trying to stimulate Aaron's multiple personality disorder because the court can not consider insane due to the initial trial proceedings. If Marty can force Aaron to bring out his alternative identity then the defense has a chance at halting the trial. The only way Marty can legally do this is through a line of questioning, so he begins to ask Aaron questions of significant discomfort. Once Marty works Aaron up enough to the breaking point he turns over the witness to the prosecuting counsel. Her line of questioning is enough to trigger Aaron's violent alternate ego Roy. This successful strategy shows how severe Aaron's case of multiple personality disorder truly is.

The most interesting aspect of the movie to me was Marty's philosophy on his job as a criminal defense attorney. This philosophy is revealed throughout the course of the movie when he is being interviewed by a journalist. His attitude towards his career is almost cavalier, as if the challenge is what excites him. This is demonstrated in scenes where he says some pretty profound things. One quote that I really liked was "Why umpire when you can play ball?". In this instance Marty is explaining why he left the prosecutors office so he could stay in litigation and avoid becoming a judge. Another statement Marty reveals about his true obsession with his job is mentioned while he is describing why he does what he does. This statement is "I don't gamble with money in Vegas because I can gamble with people's lives everyday," or something of that nature. This movie was an interesting look into unique circumstances where psychology and law intertwine in the courtroom process.

I was a first time viewer of Primal Fear and overall, I really enjoyed the movie. It kept me on the edge of my seat. Throughout the whole movie I was trying to figure out the truth about the crime. I was shocked at the ending, but after thinking through it, it made a lot of sense. I didn't really like the fact that Aaron was the made-up personality because, like his effect on Marty, he had sort of grown on me.

There were many references to psychology in this movie. The most evident one, in my opinion, was the fact that Aaron supposedly had schizophrenia. He would black out and "lose time" whenever the psychiatrist or Marty frustrated him or made him angry. This, in itself, brings forth many forms of psychology from clinical psychology, with the psychiatrist analyzing him, to social psychology, with how the way "Roy" chose to interact with his attorney. It also dips into forensic psychology in a sense that because Aaron had a mental disorder, they could have tried him as insane. It's pretty scary to think that a psycho like Roy could have so easily tricked all of the people involved with his case and been back out in society in a couple months.

Another reference was when Marty was telling Aaron how to act in front of the judge and jury. He was trying to alter their impressions of the defendant by making him look and appear more innocent. He also wanted him to have a suit to appear cleaner. The perception that the jury has of client can play a huge role in how they rule. Marty also didn't want Aaron to answer any questions until examined by a professional. This was probably because he didn't want him hurting his chance of winning the case by saying something that could resonate with the jury.

Psychology is definitely present in the reiteration of a certain question throughout the film. How can defense attorneys do what they do? Marty explains this to a magazine journalist at the beginning of the movie, but his answer shifts a little as the case continues. Once he realizes that Aaron could have actually done it, he has trouble dealing with it. This could also just be him fearing that he could lose the case.

Social psychology is evident during the actual trial. Both the prosecutor and defense try to manipulate witnesses and trick the jury into thinking a specific thing.

I thought overall this was an interesting movie. The movie had several issues regarding accuracy in law depicted in the movie. From the beginning, the police only had one suspect and never seemed to look for any other. Their motive for arresting Aaron, was based on blood found on Aaron's clothing.
The movie explores elements on the insanity plea. I was unaware that the insanity plea had to be brought out in the beginning of the trial. The defense attorney and the psychiatrist discussed how hard it was to get an insanity plea.
The movie also showcases dissociative identity disorder more commonly known as multiple personality disorder. The defendant had a history of a traumatic childhood, his father abused him and his mother died when he was young. He described how he had blackout periods from a young age. The film showed Aaron's transition into Roy occurring after her was put into extreme stress. It was interesting how the personalities were different in terms of speech. Aaron had a very obvious stutter, and avoided eye contact, and Roy was much more confident and aggressive in his speech and looked everyone in the eye.
The trial seem fairly accurate, other than the obvious relationship of the prosecution and defense attorney. The court had all key members and they stuck to their expected roles. I thought it was odd that during direct examinations closed questions were asked. I hadn't thought about it before but appearance of the defendant is very important. The defense attorney looks out for his client by providing a suit and practicing the facial expression he would present in court.
The most interesting part of the movie was the twist at the end regarding Aaron faking multiple personalities. He had me and everyone in the movie convinced. I think in real life with the amount of psychiatrists involved, that this would be very difficult, if not impossible to do. The insanity plea is very hard to prove in real life cases, so is very rarely used.

I had never seen this movie before, and I really liked it. For one thing, Richard Gere is super sexy. And for another, it is just an overall really good movie. The first ten minutes or so were a little boring, but as soon as the major crime happens, it definitely sucks you in until the very end. Speaking of which, WOW! To be honest, I actually kind of called it (go me) but it was still shocking to watch my hypothesis be confirmed.

So, as I was just talking about, the first thing that comes to mind is the ending. The most obvious choice to pick to write about is where Multiple Personality Disorder comes into play. With the end of the trial wrapping up how it did, it made me think of multiple classes I am taking or have taken in psychology. First and foremost, last semester I took Abnormal Psychology and this semester I am taking Clinical Psychology. In Abnormal, we learned about multiple personality disorder (actually it is called Dissociative Identity Disorder, but the public confuses it with multiple personality disorder). What I think is very important to bring up here is that many psychologists believe the person is malingering, and that there really is no such disorder. Which brings me to the next class that this makes me think of: Behavior Modification. Aaron/Roy emitted this disorder so perfectly that he had everyone eating out of the palm of his hand. He manipulated everyone to buy in that he had this complex, severe mental disorder. Which also brings up the point of clinical psychology (or in this case a neuropsychologist), and how hard of job they must have weather to commit someone as insane.

I wanted to pick a “not so obvious” part of the movie to discuss for the second scene and relating it to psychology, just because I picked a very common one for my first paragraph. Since one of my favorite “ah ha” moments was from the beginning of the movie, I rewatched that part to pick a scene that relates to psychology. My first thought then was the initial recording of the crime scene. This is very important to Forensic Psychology, something I wish I knew more about. I also think it is interesting to see what the detectives and CSI regard as “important” and things they can “disregard”. I think making those distinctions would be lots of fun, but also lots of pressure. What if they overlooked something that ends up being crucial to a conviction? Unfortunately, I’m sure that happens occasionally in the real world.

One thing that stuck out most to me, though was very little in the entire scheme of the movie was how Marty called his secretary as soon as he saw the crime being televised through the media and how we wanted to be this suspect’s lawyer. As MacLin told us at the beginning of the year, this movie will change how you view defense attorneys, and she was absolutely right. At first it was a very weird concept to me that a defense attorney would WANT someone who looked so guilty like Aaron did. However, after watching this movie, it makes a bit more sense to me. Being a defense attorney is Marty’s job, his career. He better want to have the biggest and baddest case, otherwise he wouldn’t be a very good lawyer.

I remember seeing this movie when I was considerably younger, I didn't remember what it was really about but I'm glad I got the Chance to watch it again. Specifically because I am a Criminology major and I am very interested in law and how its "interpreted" in trial court.
One aspect of the movie that that I think relates to psychology is when Marty has one of his aids drop of the sex tape of Aaron of at The Prosecutors house. I think he does this not only because he can't get the evidence into the court room at this point but he also knows that the prosecutor needs something she can use for a motive and up until this point in the movie she didn't have one. He know that she would admit this evidence in court and everyone would get to see it, creating a feeling of sympathy from the jury. This happens because now its not just a senseless, brutal, murder, it was the primary result of something that had happened before the movie started.
another aspect I thought related to psychology is how Marty got Aarons' other personality "Roy" to come out in the court room. He knew that Roy only came out when Aaron felt scared and corned. He used this to his advantage in the court room and the prosecutor was the bait that got Roy to come out in front of everyone. Thus creating a mistrial and ultimately accomplishing what he set out to do in the court room in the first place, win.
The ending was especially interesting to me, and probably to everyone else who has never seen the movie before. Roy, Aarons second personality was out in the jail cell after the mistrial pretty much saying that the played the game so perfect and that there was really only one personality the one of Roy. I think this can be misleading to others in seeming like Marty just helped a brutal murderer get a chance to walk the streets again. But the fact is Aarons real, legal name is Aaron not Roy. It seems like Roy is Slowly taking full control of Aarons behaviors and attitude.

For this assignment we watched Primal Fear, I had never seen the movie before but thought that it was very interesting. It had several connections with psychology and law.

The first major connection I saw was social psychology. Throughout the whole movie I noticed there were several depictions of social psychology. It all started in the beginning with Martin when he was talking to the suspect of the murder of the arch bishop Aaron. It took social psychology to relate with Aaron to determine what happened the day of the murder and what happened exactly during the murder. Martin asked many questions to try to determine what exactly happened. While talking with Aaron he found that there may be something wrong with him. This is when he wanted to get him evaluated by a psychiatrist. Also there was a lot of social psychology between Marty and the prosecution in the case. Martin especially tried to talked and come to an agreement with the prosecution but they were not willing to and wanted to go to trial. Martin tried to sweet talk at time to get evidence and so on.

Another aspect of psychology I noticed was clinical psychology. As I kind of alluded to before while Martin was talking to Aaron he noticed something was wrong and wanted to get him evaluated by a psychiatrist. During the evaluation the doctor diagnosed Aaron with a multiple personality disorder. Furthermore she found him to be a little insane as doing the evaluation Aaron would turn into Roy. Roy was the aggressive side of Aaron who was thought to have killed the bishop. This was a huge part and major focus of the movie.

Overall I felt that the depictions of the aspects of psychology were a bit inaccurate. It seemed as if there were a lot of things left and they made it seem as the whole process goes fast when in fact it really doesn’t. I felt as if a lot of the social interactions were a bit of base as I doubt a lot of defense attorneys and prosecutors or out to a bar and talk about the case.

The most interesting part of the movie to me was learning what a multiple personality disorder was. I have heard of this disorder before but never really knew what it was. This movie seemed to depict it well and visually showed me what it is like. This really helped me to understand what this disorder is all about.

I very much enjoyed the movie, although I had seen it a few times before. Almost immediately, I noticed something I have always known to be true. Lawyers are like chameleons. A good lawyer can change his attitude or demeanor to better relate to that of whom he is attempting to coerce. Marty is an excellent example of such. He begins the movie meeting up with a Cuban while assuming a rather bold and aggressive demeanor. He is able to get what he wants out of this client this way. He uses this approach when initially discussing the murder with Aaron, demanding that Aaron stop discussing his case. He goes as far as to declare himself as Aaron's "mother, father, best friend, and priest." When discussing Aaron's case with his colleagues, Marty comes across as cold and heartless, caring more about winning his case than the merit of the outcome. Social psychology rears it's head early on when Marty insists that attorney not use the words like "heinous" in a courtroom because the average Joe won't know what the word means. Something as simple as language can influence how others think. Attorneys would like to use clear, direct language so they know everyone on the jury will understand.

We also see an example of forensic psychology when the prosecution displays bloody sneakers worn by Aaron the night of the murder. The shoes had been analyzed and show the blood of both Stampler and the Bishop. The positive id on the analysis should convince the jury to render a guilty verdict, or at the very least re-think a verdict of not guilty. The presence of blood indicates that Aaron was at the scene of the crime.

We continue to see social psychology at work as the attorneys battle it out in the courtroom. The lawyers must be able to relate to the jurors in order to better persuade them. Marty knows how Aaron must sound and look in front of the jury in order to render a positive verdict. In his second meeting with Aaron, Marty instructs Aaron how to do this. "I speak, you do not speak." "That's exactly how I want you to look!" "Don't smile." These are just a few examples I heard during the second meeting. First impressions are extremely important, so it is vital that Marty correctly instruct Aaron how to act in front of a jury of his peers. After all, they ultimately will be deciding Aaron's fate. Also, pleading the 5th on all questions in Stampler's first court appearance was clever in that it was meant to deceive the jury into thinking Aaron Stampler was not mentally capable of standing trial, let alone being declared guilty of murder in the first. This was an excellent example of clinical psychology in that we ask ourselves whether Aaron is mentally competent to stand trial. Aaron Stampler is a cold, calculated killer who is an expert in deceiving others. I was amazed at Aaron's ability to come across as innocent. He speaks softly, stutters, and acts as though he has no idea what anyone is talking about. Then, right when he has everyone reeled in, he realizes it and quickly changes his demeanor. The changes in attitude seem too abrupt to me to be considered genuine. I suppose the sexual abuse has caused Aaron to seek an alternate identity (Roy) to better cope (at least this is what I believe Aaron wants to convey). As a result, the jury will be led to think that the alter-ego Aaron has created has committed the crime. The psychologist who spent over 60 hours with Aaron reiterates this point, stating that Aaron suffers from multiple personality disorder stemming from sexual abuse. This is yet another fine example of clinical psychology in the courtroom. I believe that the most difficult task in any court proceeding where the defendant claims insanity is proving just that. There is simply too much room for imagination and deception in determining one's sanity (my opinion). I saw elements of social psychology in the dinner meeting between Gere and Linney. Linney is describing to Gere how the jury will think differently depending on who shows the tape. If Gere shows it, it dishonors the Bishop's memory in the jury's eyes. However, if Linney shows it, Gere gains sympathy for his "poor, abused boy."

After watching this movie, I can liken attorneys to chess players. There are more (psychological) elements at work in a courtroom than I had ever realized. There truly is strategy to EVERYTHING an attorney does or says in a courtroom. In this movie, not only did we see a game of chess between opposing sides, but also one from within as Gere sought truth from Norton from the beginning. Norton would continue to lie to and deceive his own lawyer to the very end. This was very surprising to me. You would think that a defendant would want to upfront with his/her attorney in order to secure a better defense strategy. All in all a great movie about the inner workings of our justice system and the many psychological elements tangled within.

This movie was AMAZING! The ending twist had my jaw dropped to the floor. I was so shocked and could not believe it. The movie itself was great and to have a twist like that it was unreal. I loved every bit of it. After being in this class for over a month, I can already tie in the things I have learned into this movie which I would have never thought of if I weren't in this class.

The first relation to psychology I noticed was the tie between clinical psychology and law. Marty had Aaron to be examined by the neuropsychologist before he testified anything. The psychologist and Aaron spent 60 hours together taped so she could determine if he possessed a mental disorder. I believe this was depicted well in the movie because the person would spend many hours with the defendant with a camera to get to know them and be able to review that tape and use it as possible evidence. Aaron was diagnosed with multiple personality disorder. The other personality he had was named Roy. The two personalities were complete opposites and she had it on tape. Marty experienced this with the tape off which I thought would hurt them while I was watching the movie besides the fact it was on tape from before with the psychologist. This movie made it very hard for me to want to believe people who plea insane more than before. I never really believed in that and after this movie it confirmed that belief due to the ending. Aaron had no other evidence to prove he had multiple personality disorder except what was for the case. My point being is this is the only time anyone saw his other personality so anyone could do this if he or she committed a crime. There was no further evidence of his other personality, Roy, at any other time or seen by anyone else. I know it is fiction but I believe it was acted out very realistically in the courtroom when he switched personalities because his intelligent lawyer knew how to play the game, as did the defendant. Little did they each know about each other, which I feel Marty should have known he could not trust Aaron like he stated earlier in the movie when he experienced the transition to Roy firsthand. I truly feel Aaron's personality is actually Roy. I feel he made up Aaron specifically for this case so he could get off which is sheer genius. This makes me weary on pleading insanity, anyone could do this and it is scary to me.

Social psychology is evident throughout this movie. The interactions among all participants in the trial is social psychology in the works. Marty asked Aaron questions about himself such as when he moved to chicago, what his suit size was, where he was from, etc. in his cell before everything began because he wanted Aaron to feel like he could trust Marty. Aaron said he thought that information was printed on his documents but Marty was trying to establish his interest in Aaron and not just the case. I also saw the same sort of approach with Aaron and his psychologist. The psychologist began with personal questions about Aaron's relationships with his family and the archbishop. She gradually progressed into deeper conversation to make him feel more comfortable sharing valuable information. I believe both of those scenes were depicted very well as both the psychologist and Marty kept professional, but yet were open to Aaron. Marty also told Aaron he was Aaron's new father, head figure in his life at that moment, making Aaron feel like he needs to tell Marty everything. Social psychology is used throughout the movie when Marty uses a different style of approach towards the other young man in the alley way when he ran away from him. Marty changed the way he acted so he could communicate with the guy to get the information he needed from him and so he would respect and cooperate with Marty. I feel like the situation was hollywood because I cannot see some lawyers in their suits chasing a man down the street and getting a knife away from them being able to get all of the information needed from the person. Social psychology was used between the prosecutor and the defense attorney because Marty would try to get close to the prosecuting attorney although they both had a history of intimacy together, he was trying to use that to win his case. He was very strategic in the way he went about speaking and approaching her to make her feel like he was not only into her because of the case. This are just some examples of the usage of social psychology in this movie but in all reality, this entire movie consisted of social psychology because it is a very critical aspect of law and psychology.

All in all I believe this movie depicted psychology usage as well as law by itself accurately to my knowledge. It kept me hooked and had a great twist like I mentioned earlier. I found it very fun and interesting to be able to apply what I have learned from class into this movie.

This was the first time I had ever seen the movie Primal Fear and I must say that I am a fan of this movie. There are good actors in this movie too such as Richard Gere and Edward Norton. This movie, made in 1996, ties well with psychology.
One part that fits well with what we talked about in class was when the attorney Martin went into Aaron's jail cell to discuss how he should look when going into trial. We talked about this in class pretty recently and found that the way you look in the courtroom is important because it could have an affect on the way the jury sees you and the way they give their verdict. If a defendant looks mean or angry, juries are more likely to have a guilty verdict. However if the defendant looks more nice and innocent they might be more likely to lean towards not guilty. That's why Martin wanted Aaron to wear a suit and look presentable in the courtroom so it would be easier to persuade the jury and the judge.
An important psychological concept prevalent in this movie is clinical psychology. The part where Aaron is talking with the psychiatrist is a good example of this. The psychiatrist is trying to see whether or not Aaron has some sort personality disorder and I think that this is obviously something that is done in real life however I think more tests would be done in order to tell whether or not he really did have multiple personality disorder. I feel like the insanity plea is used a lot and I think if a criminal was very convincing he would get away with faking it, which kind of makes you second guess the insanity plea.
Another type of psychology used in this movie is the use of forensic psychology. This is prevalent because you can see the crime scene, the CSI and other aspects like that so you can get a feel for how it might go down in real life and also see how the crime plays out during the movie.
I think the ending was really interesting. Throughout the movie you kind of have your doubts about whether or not Aaron actually has multiple personality disorder but the ending just blows your mind. I would definitely recommend this movie to other people because it's a very good movie.

Watching Primal Fear probably was one of our most interesting and attention-grabbing assignments yet. I really appreciate our Hybrid class and the range of ways we are learning about Psychology and Law. I'll be honest and say I didn't get the opportunity to finish the movie but I definitely plan on going back and finishing it. From now on I dont believe ill be able to watch another movie involving the processes of pychology without looking at how it overlaps with the law.

The first aspect of psychology I noticed was the perception that everyone had of Aaron Stampler. The the press does a flawless job of creating a kind of "human propagada" and gives the suspect the nickname, "The Butcher Boy". I think the renaming of Aaron Stampler fuels the trial and makes it more interesting in the eyes of the people. This nicknaming can also have negative affects on things like the verdicts of the jury members. I think psychological perceptions also overlaps with social psychology because of the way people will think of Stampler by associating the nickname with his crime.

In the scene where Martin is speaking with a doctor about looking into Aaron Stampler's amnesia problem, I believe there is Some clinical psychology involved in her attempt to diagnose him. She gives reason why a person would experience amnesia. Those include substance abuse, seisures, and head trauma/injury. I remember talking about these major causes of amnesia in my last semester intro to psychology class. The doctor concludes that she will do the testing on the young man and also would like to conduct and MRI and MEG scan on his brain. These things all have to do with Clinical Psychology and a little bit of cognitive psychology as well.

The relationship between Martin Vale and the Prosecuting counselor depicts more and more social psychology as the movie goes on. In the second courtroom scene, the pair continue to bicker back and forth almost being comical at times. These attorneys know their gameplan and use these socially psychological tactics to not only draw the case out but to confuse the jury and even try to split the jury by making them choose sides. Using this aspect of psychology, we also see how the innocent face and stuttering Kentucky-acented of Stampler could play a huge part in the ruling of this case. People dont expect to see a smooth faced, little boy as having the ability and the anger inside of him to kill someone like a preist. His ability to not look the murderer part plays in his favor for a while.

This was my first time seeing Primal Fear, and I really enjoyed it. The movie is full of psychology, from social to clinical, to behaviorism. It's all there. Psychology and law also intersect several times. In this movie, we see both the beginning and the end of the legal process with the crime being committed and the following trial and acquitting. Barely any of the middle ground of the legal process is seen, mostly because it didn't have any entertainment value and because the story was centered around the defense attorney.
One part of the movie that I think (or hope really) was depicted inaccurately was the functioning of police. Directly after the crime, the movie depicted media swarming the scene as well as numerous people, including the attorneys, entering and leaving the scene. According to what we've talked about in class and read in the police handbooks, this is horribly inaccurate. The police's job after a crime is primarily keeping the scene sterile and uncompromised. If the police's role was accurately depicted, the crime scene would have been sealed up more tightly.
For entertainment purposes, the movie also played up the role of the "lazy cop" when Marty went to the crime scene and stole the tape. The cop wasn't even posted in the actual crime scene and gave Marty a halfhearted warning about not touching anything from the scene. I think (and again hope) that this isn't the actual attitude a cop would take when guarding a crime scene. I'm not even sure if defense attorneys would have access to a crime scene while trial was in session. I feel like the scene would have been cleaned up by that time in the timeline if they were already prosecuting a witness.
Other, more obvious, parts of the movie that intersected psychology and law were the social psychology coming into play at the beginning of the movie and the clinical psychology discussed during the trial.
When Marty and Aaron first meet in his cell, Marty asks for Aaron's suit measurements. He also wants to take advantage of Aaron's "innocent" look. Marty is playing on the social psychology of impressions. We make impressions of people based firstly on their appearance. By dressing him up and having him look more innocent, Marty is trying to give the jury a better opinion of Aaron than if he were to have different features presented. I feel like these points were emphasized and exaggerated maybe a little, but they are definitely accurate. Real defendants are encouraged to wear formal clothing and to not make "incriminating" facial expressions during trial. Like we talked about in class, the job of the defense attorney is to tell a story, and this was highlighted in the film.
Clinical psychology comes to play during the trial, when we find out from a clinical psychologist that Aaron (allegedly) has textbook symptoms of Multiple Personality Disorder. Later, after "Aaron" has a "break-down" in the courtroom, the judge gives him a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. These aspects of psychology and law were obviously exaggerated for entertainment value, but Multiple Personality Disorder is a real personality disorder and the symptoms presented were true symptoms of the disorder.
If you were curious, the behaviorism that I mentioned at the beginning was referring to the prosecutor's smoking habits, but that doesn't really have to deal with psych and law. I just thought it was funny and interesting and included behavior modification which I have been trained to recognize in everyday life by one Otto Maclin.
The most interesting aspect of the movie for me was probably the same as everyone who saw this for the first time. I'm obviously talking about the ending, when we discover that Aaron's disorder is all made up. I was thrown for a loop as I'm sure others were. However, I'm not sure how authentic that situation could really be. I'm a psychology student, and I don't think I could actively portray symptoms of a disorder so perfectly to actually be able to trick a clinical psychologist or a jury into believing that I had that disorder.
Overall, I really enjoyed the movie and the opportunity to observe psychology and law intersecting in such an entertaining way.