PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The test — which has been used in Canada, the U.S. and U.K. — measures a list of 20 traits, such as whether someone is glib or has superficial charm, is impulsive, or lacks remorse or empathy. Each trait is ranked 0 (not present), 1 (possibly present), or 2 (definitely present). A score of 30 or more out of 40 indicates psychopathy; scores above 25 indicate “clinically significant levels of psychopathy.” In practice, high scores on the PCR-L have often meant a more severe punishment, with a longer wait for parole. They also attach the label — “psychopath” — which conjures stereotypes of an unfeeling, inhuman and incurable horror-movie monster. But more than 20 years of data shows that PCL-R scoring does not accurately identify individuals at higher risk to reoffend, the study found. Meanwhile, the view that psychopathy is an “untreatable” fact of a person’s identity falls apart in the face of growing evidence that people with high test scores benefit from rehabilitation programs, the same as people with lower scores. “It’s actually quite underwhelming what it can perform, this tool,” Larsen, assistant professor of forensic epistemology and philosophy of science at the University of Toronto Mississauga, told the Star this week."
--------------------------------------------------
STORY: "This made-in-Canada ‘psychopath test’ doesn’t work and has no place in courts, major study finds," by Courts Reporter Betsy Powell, published by The Toronto Star, on February 14, 2026. (Betsy Powell is a reporter with the crime, courts and justice team at the Star. She is the author of Bad Seeds: the True Story of Toronto’s Galloway Boys Street Gang. A truly great author/court reporter I had the pleasure of working with her at The Toronto Star. HL);
SUB-HEADING: “We should probably consider a complete moratorium on these types of assessments,” says U of T researcher Rasmus Rosenberg Larsen
PHOTO CAPTION: "When you hear the word “psychopath,” chances are these are some of the faces that come to mind — from left to right, serial killers Clifford Olson, Paul Bernardo, Ted Bundy and Charles Manson are seen in file photos. In the justice system, that association is part of the problem, a new study says."
-------------------------------------------
GIST: "A made-in-Canada test to detect whether a criminal is a “psychopath” is outdated, unreliable, and a poor predictor of recidivism, says a University of Toronto researcher who is calling for an end to its use in criminal courts.
“We should probably consider a complete moratorium on these types of assessments,” says Rasmus Rosenberg Larsen, the lead author of the largest study yet of how psychopathy tests are used in legal settings.
The study’s findings add to a growing body of research raising concerns about the tests, which have been used to profile some of Canada’s most notorious criminals, help predict their likelihood of reoffending and advise judges on the appropriate sentence.
The most widely used diagnostic test is called the Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised, or PCL-R, developed by Dr. Robert Hare, a now-retired Canadian forensic psychologist, in the 1980s.
The test — which has been used in Canada, the U.S. and U.K. — measures a list of 20 traits, such as whether someone is glib or has superficial charm, is impulsive, or lacks remorse or empathy. Each trait is ranked 0 (not present), 1 (possibly present), or 2 (definitely present). A score of 30 or more out of 40 indicates psychopathy; scores above 25 indicate “clinically significant levels of psychopathy.”
In practice, high scores on the PCR-L have often meant a more severe punishment, with a longer wait for parole.
They also attach the label — “psychopath” — which conjures stereotypes of an unfeeling, inhuman and incurable horror-movie monster.
But more than 20 years of data shows that PCL-R scoring does not accurately identify individuals at higher risk to reoffend, the study found. Meanwhile, the view that psychopathy is an “untreatable” fact of a person’s identity falls apart in the face of growing evidence that people with high test scores benefit from rehabilitation programs, the same as people with lower scores.
“It’s actually quite underwhelming what it can perform, this tool,” Larsen, assistant professor of forensic epistemology and philosophy of science at the University of Toronto Mississauga, told the Star this week.
“Assessing complex personality traits is very difficult to do,” he said. Since the PCL-R first gained traction, “we’re much more skeptical about whether you can sit down with a person and talk to them for two hours and then, as a clinician, make a confident statement that actually captures a personality trait,” he added.
“I’m personally very skeptical if that’s something we can do.”
The PCL-R rose to prominence in the legal system in the 1990s and early 2000s, when courts began to routinely admit psychopathy assessments as expert evidence promising an “evidence-based prediction” of future outcomes.
Those with high scores were generally regarded as the “worst of the worst,” untreatable and at a high risk to reoffend, Larsen explained.
Among notable Canadian criminals, B.C. serial killer Clifford Olson scored a 37 out of 40 on the test; Scarborough rapist and killer Paul Bernardo scored a 36.
The new study, published in the journal Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, was based on a review of 3,315 Canadian court cases between 1980 and 2023. The review found that PCL-R testing exploded in Canada between 2000 and its peak of 249 reported cases in 2013. Half of the assessments were used to diagnose psychopathy, or as a tool for risk-assessment — a key step in deciding an offender’s security level in prison, the intensity of their supervision on parole, or even whether they get the dreaded “dangerous offender” designation.
The test’s use has declined from that peak, however, to only 93 reported cases in 2023.
Despite the decline, the PCL-R test results are still being used in Toronto courtrooms, including the high-profile trials of mass murderer Alek Minassian and sex offender Jacob Hoggard. In both of those cases, it was defence lawyers who introduced the expert evidence to show their clients scored low on the psychopathic scale.
That points to one major issue with the test. Looking at the court data, Larsen said his research group has corroborated previous studies that identified “adversarial allegiance” — where psychopathy scores appear to vary “significantly” depending on who hired the person administering the test, the prosecution or defence.
“It’s not necessarily something experts do deliberately … but you feel like you should perform according to who’s hired you,” he said.
When the justice system turns to experts, “we want that information to be informative, and it seems like that’s not the case here.”
Why Larsen says the test doesn’t belong in court
Inside the courts, the key problem is that when a person receives the “psychopathy” label due to a high PCL-R score, judges, juries and parole boards are likely to make assumptions about a person that are not based on reliable evidence.
In one example, the new study references a previous survey of 400 jurors. Respondents rated extreme serial killers, such as Ted Bundy and Charles Manson, as typical examples of psychopathy, and a majority of participants said their main source of information came from movies and TV.
For Larsen’s study, the researchers examined how experts have described the importance of a high PCL-R result in more than 100 Canadian court cases. A majority of the expert opinions advised the court that psychopathy is a “fundamentally untreatable condition,” or even one that gets worse with treatment.
“It is difficult to overstate how misleading and detached these statements are from the empirical research literature,” the study notes. While psychopathy has traditionally been seen as an untreatable condition, the research “has always told a different story.”
Since the early 2000s, dozens of studies have shown that treatment and rehabilitation programs have a positive effect on “psychopathic” patients, the study says. Despite this, the experts in the Canadian court cases testified to a “moderate” chance of treatment success just five per cent of the time.
“The logical conclusion is that such testimonies cannot claim to carry much or any probative value,” the study says. And since these expert testimonies can significantly impact decision-making in court, it concludes, “it can be argued that a judge should view such evidence as prejudicial in nature.”
Larsen, who is the author of the book “Psychopathy Unmasked: The Rise and Fall of a Dangerous Diagnosis,” explains that other risk-assessment tools now “significantly outperform” the PCL-R.
He added that it is his impression in the workshops he holds with correctional psychologists that “enthusiasm about psychopathy in general, but also the PCL-R in particular, is significantly on the decline.”
He predicts the concept of psychopathy will be “the next psychiatric diagnosis that’s going to fall.”
The very simple rule, Larsen said, is that “past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour, and it doesn’t really matter what personality we think you have — it really doesn’t.”"
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AMFINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------
