Back on April 30, 2008, I wrote a relatively brief post on Josef Fritzl, the "Austrian Cellar Father" who kept his daughter, Elisabeth, as a sex-slave in a specially built dungeon below their house for years. In addition, he fathered seven children with her, including one who died soon after birth (and who he disposed of in a furnace).
As additional details begin to emerge, a picture is beginning to form on just what the relevant psycho-legal issues are regarding Fritzl's mental health, with the key question at this point (from a legal perspective) being whether Fritzl was legally insane at the time of the offense. This issue was noted based on comments found in a link in my previous post, as well as in this article, where Fritzl's attorney, Rudolph Mayer, said: "In my personal opinion, Josef Fritzl is mentally ill and therefore not responsible for his actions."
A broader question for the Austrian authorities is how to charge this man, and for what crimes (beyond the obvious). The authorities appear to want to obtain as long a prison sentence as possible for Fritzl, based on this quote from Detective Inspector Polzer: "We want to see this man die in prison. It will take a lot longer than ten years for his victims to recover from what he put them through." However, in Austria, even a double-murder would only carry a fifteen-year sentence, which may be reduced with good behavior.
Based on the articles above, as well as this article and this article, there is some information trickling out about Fritzl's mental health status. Not enough for anything more than a cursory view of the situation, but enough to discuss what sorts of issues are important for forensic evaluators to consider when conducting an evaluation for sanity at the time of the offense.
The first step is having a thorough understanding of the legal definition of sanity for the relevant jurisdiction. as well as related case law. Unfortunately, I was not able to obtain any information regarding the specific definition of legal sanity in Austria (if anyone has access to the legal standard in Austria, please let me know!). This is vitally important, because different definitions encompass varying types of offenses and mental health conditions. For example, prior to John Hinckley's attempted assassination of President Regan, United States Federal Law regarding sanity carried two separate "prongs." The first (which still exists) is that an individual, at the time of the offense, was suffering from a severe mental disease of defect, such that they did not appreciate the nature, quality, or wrongfulness of their actions. In other words, the individual was so incapacitated by a severe mental health issue they did not know what they were doing was wrong. This is a pretty high bar, which is why the insanity defense is rarely employed, and rarely successful when employed.
The second prong, since removed, spoke to an "irresistible impulse." That is, the individual knew what they were doing was wrong, but (due to a severe mental health issue) were "compelled" to act anyway. Without getting into whether this second prong is good or bad, one can see the second prong includes a whole lot more types of conditions and behaviors under the area of sanity.
So, the first step is to gain an understanding of the definition of legal sanity and insanity in Austria. Once that understanding is obtained, we can examine Fritzl, and whether he meets the first criteria. Whether there is one prong or more than one, the common denominator will be whether, at the time of the offense, Fritzl was suffering from a severe mental disease or defect. The wording may be different, but the concept is the same - in order for the insanity defense to apply, there would have to be evidence Josef Fritzl was suffering from a severe mental health problem. In this case, his attorney will have a tough road ahead of him.
Why? There are several reasons. First, simply look at "the time of the offense." We are talking decades here. Even the most serious of mental health issues fluctuate in severity, with periods of clarity. It is difficult to imagine any scenario where an individual was suffering a mental health disorder chronically for such a long period of time. Of course, there are cognitive deficits, which are stable. But Josef Fritzl does not appear to have had any difficulty with cognition - he worked as an electrical engineer, obtaining employment even after a previous conviction for rape due to his ability to invent new devices. He also invested in a restaurant, and conducted real estate deals. Individuals with cognitive impairments severe enough to qualify as a "severe mental disease or defect" are not able to participate in these types of activities. During the entire time of his crime, he was able to present as reasonably logical, organized, and functional - to an extent that precludes a serious mental disease or defect.
So, if he does not suffer from a severe mental disease of defect (usually reserved for diagnoses like schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, etc.), what is his deal? Without a thorough evaluation, there is no way to say for certain. However, certain traits appear to be likely, based on information from the news articles linked to above. For example, there appears to be a strong narcissistic streak, as evidenced by his overwhelming sense of entitlement, lack of empathy, arrogance, exploitative streak (and not just of his daughter), and sense of grandiosity. Here was a man who was vain enough to "dress up" and wear a hair piece when he went into his basement to rape his daughter. He forced her to wear skimpy outfits and lingerie, exhibited extreme jealousy of his daughter prior to enslaving her, and did all of this in the very home of his family. In addition, it appears he had his wife actually do most of the work on the various businesses while he took the credit, he went to Thailand for trips without his family (one can only speculate why at this point, but obviously the police will be examining this as well), and demanded obedience to his authority in the home. Even now, while incarcerated, the authorities note he is "obsessed" with watching the news coverage of himself on the television.
Beyond Narcissistic Personality Disorder, it is quite possible Fritzl is a psychopath. A discussion of the definition of psychopathy is beyond the purpose of this post (just click the link to learn more), but psychopathy is basically formed by the presence of two separate factors: an aggressive narcissism (which was addressed above), as well as a socially deviant lifestyle (as roughly accounted for by Antisocial Personality Disorder ). Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is accounted for by such symptoms as chronic lying and deceitfulness, chronic rule and law-breaking, lack of remorse, impulsivity or failure to plan ahead, involvement in fights or assaults, and chronic irresponsibility. In addition, one will generally see early behavior problems, a parasitic lifestyle, multiple relationships/marriages, and poor behavioral controls. Assessing for psychopathy is not so much an "either/or" process, but rather "how much?" That is, is there a minimal, low, moderate, or high degree of psychopathy present? A thorough evaluation would be necessary to pin this down(based on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist - Revised, or PCL-R), but it would appear based only on what we know so far Fritzl would meet the criteria for at least some of these symptoms.
Beyond that, I'm not sure. However, the presence of personality disorders, even psychopathy, does not rise to the level of a "severe mental disease or defect," at least in a legal sense. Behaviors resulting from these diagnoses are considered to be volitional in nature (at least in America), and are not grounds for a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI).
Without the severe mental health diagnosis, the second part (unable to understand wrongfulness) would be moot. However, for argument's sake, we can examine this issue fairly quickly. He built a dungeon. He created an elaborate ruse (stating his daughter ran away to a cult), which he bolstered with letters that he wrote, as well as forcing his daughter to write. He created other alibis and excuses. In addition, he had been previously convicted for a sexual offense, suggesting a knowledge of wrongfulness. Lastly, Fritzl himself stated he "knew the whole time that was he was doing was wrong." He sometimes wondered "whether he was crazy for doing such acts."In this case, asking the question answers it, in that he acknowledges an awareness the acts were wrong.
The "irresistible impulse" prong would, however, be tricker. Again, I am not aware of the particulars of Austrian law, but generally speaking, commission of sex offenses does not fall under this concept. He set up a situation for himself to act of his desires at will, but but he still demonstrated an ability to resist his impulses, and to plan ahead, when necessary. In addition, his other crimes (including a non-sexual crime, insurance fraud - he burned a property for the money) demonstrate more of an antisocial personality disorder than an impulse restricted to one discrete area of his life. In short, this prong does not appear to be available either, though I would imagine if his defense pursues this, and this prong is available in Austria, this would be the prong they would pursue.
Overall, this story is horrific. I can't even begin to imagine what the life of Elisabeth and her children was like in that 15'x15' dungeon, let alone what the recovery process will be. I would imagine only the five-year old has any real shot at anything close to a full recovery, though human resiliency can sometimes be amazing. I cannot help but question a legal system that allows someone who has done this to be free in ten years, though that is obviously a question for the people of Austria to address. It may be that a finding of insanity is better in the long run, assuming Austria has an indeterminate length on their insanity holds. That may be the only way from keeping Josef Fritzl from victimizing anyone else, including his family, who should never have to set foot in his presence again.
Back on April 30, 2008, I wrote a relatively brief post on Josef Fritzl, the "Austrian Cellar Father" who kept his daughter, Elisabeth, as a sex-slave in a specially built dungeon below their house for years. In addition, he fathered seven children with her, including one who died soon after birth (and who he disposed of in a furnace).
As additional details begin to emerge, a picture is beginning to form on just what the relevant psycho-legal issues are regarding Fritzl's mental health, with the key question at this point (from a legal perspective) being whether Fritzl was legally insane at the time of the offense. This issue was noted based on comments found in a link in my previous post, as well as in this article, where Fritzl's attorney, Rudolph Mayer, said: "In my personal opinion, Josef Fritzl is mentally ill and therefore not responsible for his actions."
A broader question for the Austrian authorities is how to charge this man, and for what crimes (beyond the obvious). The authorities appear to want to obtain as long a prison sentence as possible for Fritzl, based on this quote from Detective Inspector Polzer: "We want to see this man die in prison. It will take a lot longer than ten years for his victims to recover from what he put them through." However, in Austria, even a double-murder would only carry a fifteen-year sentence, which may be reduced with good behavior.
Based on the articles above, as well as this article and this article, there is some information trickling out about Fritzl's mental health status. Not enough for anything more than a cursory view of the situation, but enough to discuss what sorts of issues are important for forensic evaluators to consider when conducting an evaluation for sanity at the time of the offense.
The first step is having a thorough understanding of the legal definition of sanity for the relevant jurisdiction. as well as related case law. Unfortunately, I was not able to obtain any information regarding the specific definition of legal sanity in Austria (if anyone has access to the legal standard in Austria, please let me know!). This is vitally important, because different definitions encompass varying types of offenses and mental health conditions. For example, prior to John Hinckley's attempted assassination of President Regan, United States Federal Law regarding sanity carried two separate "prongs." The first (which still exists) is that an individual, at the time of the offense, was suffering from a severe mental disease of defect, such that they did not appreciate the nature, quality, or wrongfulness of their actions. In other words, the individual was so incapacitated by a severe mental health issue they did not know what they were doing was wrong. This is a pretty high bar, which is why the insanity defense is rarely employed, and rarely successful when employed.
The second prong, since removed, spoke to an "irresistible impulse." That is, the individual knew what they were doing was wrong, but (due to a severe mental health issue) were "compelled" to act anyway. Without getting into whether this second prong is good or bad, one can see the second prong includes a whole lot more types of conditions and behaviors under the area of sanity.
So, the first step is to gain an understanding of the definition of legal sanity and insanity in Austria. Once that understanding is obtained, we can examine Fritzl, and whether he meets the first criteria. Whether there is one prong or more than one, the common denominator will be whether, at the time of the offense, Fritzl was suffering from a severe mental disease or defect. The wording may be different, but the concept is the same - in order for the insanity defense to apply, there would have to be evidence Josef Fritzl was suffering from a severe mental health problem. In this case, his attorney will have a tough road ahead of him.
Why? There are several reasons. First, simply look at "the time of the offense." We are talking decades here. Even the most serious of mental health issues fluctuate in severity, with periods of clarity. It is difficult to imagine any scenario where an individual was suffering a mental health disorder chronically for such a long period of time. Of course, there are cognitive deficits, which are stable. But Josef Fritzl does not appear to have had any difficulty with cognition - he worked as an electrical engineer, obtaining employment even after a previous conviction for rape due to his ability to invent new devices. He also invested in a restaurant, and conducted real estate deals. Individuals with cognitive impairments severe enough to qualify as a "severe mental disease or defect" are not able to participate in these types of activities. During the entire time of his crime, he was able to present as reasonably logical, organized, and functional - to an extent that precludes a serious mental disease or defect.
So, if he does not suffer from a severe mental disease of defect (usually reserved for diagnoses like schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, etc.), what is his deal? Without a thorough evaluation, there is no way to say for certain. However, certain traits appear to be likely, based on information from the news articles linked to above. For example, there appears to be a strong narcissistic streak, as evidenced by his overwhelming sense of entitlement, lack of empathy, arrogance, exploitative streak (and not just of his daughter), and sense of grandiosity. Here was a man who was vain enough to "dress up" and wear a hair piece when he went into his basement to rape his daughter. He forced her to wear skimpy outfits and lingerie, exhibited extreme jealousy of his daughter prior to enslaving her, and did all of this in the very home of his family. In addition, it appears he had his wife actually do most of the work on the various businesses while he took the credit, he went to Thailand for trips without his family (one can only speculate why at this point, but obviously the police will be examining this as well), and demanded obedience to his authority in the home. Even now, while incarcerated, the authorities note he is "obsessed" with watching the news coverage of himself on the television.
Beyond Narcissistic Personality Disorder, it is quite possible Fritzl is a psychopath. A discussion of the definition of psychopathy is beyond the purpose of this post (just click the link to learn more), but psychopathy is basically formed by the presence of two separate factors: an aggressive narcissism (which was addressed above), as well as a socially deviant lifestyle (as roughly accounted for by Antisocial Personality Disorder ). Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is accounted for by such symptoms as chronic lying and deceitfulness, chronic rule and law-breaking, lack of remorse, impulsivity or failure to plan ahead, involvement in fights or assaults, and chronic irresponsibility. In addition, one will generally see early behavior problems, a parasitic lifestyle, multiple relationships/marriages, and poor behavioral controls. Assessing for psychopathy is not so much an "either/or" process, but rather "how much?" That is, is there a minimal, low, moderate, or high degree of psychopathy present? A thorough evaluation would be necessary to pin this down(based on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist - Revised, or PCL-R), but it would appear based only on what we know so far Fritzl would meet the criteria for at least some of these symptoms.
Beyond that, I'm not sure. However, the presence of personality disorders, even psychopathy, does not rise to the level of a "severe mental disease or defect," at least in a legal sense. Behaviors resulting from these diagnoses are considered to be volitional in nature (at least in America), and are not grounds for a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI).
Without the severe mental health diagnosis, the second part (unable to understand wrongfulness) would be moot. However, for argument's sake, we can examine this issue fairly quickly. He built a dungeon. He created an elaborate ruse (stating his daughter ran away to a cult), which he bolstered with letters that he wrote, as well as forcing his daughter to write. He created other alibis and excuses. In addition, he had been previously convicted for a sexual offense, suggesting a knowledge of wrongfulness. Lastly, Fritzl himself stated he "knew the whole time that was he was doing was wrong." He sometimes wondered "whether he was crazy for doing such acts."In this case, asking the question answers it, in that he acknowledges an awareness the acts were wrong.
The "irresistible impulse" prong would, however, be tricker. Again, I am not aware of the particulars of Austrian law, but generally speaking, commission of sex offenses does not fall under this concept. He set up a situation for himself to act of his desires at will, but but he still demonstrated an ability to resist his impulses, and to plan ahead, when necessary. In addition, his other crimes (including a non-sexual crime, insurance fraud - he burned a property for the money) demonstrate more of an antisocial personality disorder than an impulse restricted to one discrete area of his life. In short, this prong does not appear to be available either, though I would imagine if his defense pursues this, and this prong is available in Austria, this would be the prong they would pursue.
Overall, this story is horrific. I can't even begin to imagine what the life of Elisabeth and her children was like in that 15'x15' dungeon, let alone what the recovery process will be. I would imagine only the five-year old has any real shot at anything close to a full recovery, though human resiliency can sometimes be amazing. I cannot help but question a legal system that allows someone who has done this to be free in ten years, though that is obviously a question for the people of Austria to address. It may be that a finding of insanity is better in the long run, assuming Austria has an indeterminate length on their insanity holds. That may be the only way from keeping Josef Fritzl from victimizing anyone else, including his family, who should never have to set foot in his presence again.