SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

The Defendant-Appellant, Ms. Rasmieh Yousef Odeh, asserts that she is a victim of torture, including sexual violence and rape. She was diagnosed as suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following an evaluation by a qualified clinical psychologist. Defendant-Appellant Odeh was denied the opportunity to present evidence at trial on the symptoms of PTSD, the psychological effects of having endured and survived torture, and the impact of these symptoms on her mental state in relation to the charges against her.

When considering the admissibility of psychological evidence, the question is not whether the crime is specific or general intent – it is whether the psychological evidence could negate an element of the offense. In this case, knowledge or willfulness is an element of the offense. Testimony from a clinical psychologist on Defendant-Appellant’s mental health is clearly relevant to that mens rea determination. In this case, that testimony was wrongfully excluded.

In the experience of amici, including the IRCT’s experience in treating tens of thousands of torture victims worldwide per year, and as supported by scientific literature, all torture produces psychological effects, which may be long-term, farreaching, and even more debilitating than its physical effects on victims. The most common of these are PTSD and major depression.

Extensive research carried out primarily in the last thirty years clearly establishes that torture victims often develop psychological symptoms and responses, such as avoidance and dissociation, to avoid retraumatization. These responses can affect volition as it relates to action and intention. Such psychological responses serve as defense mechanisms that compel victims to act based on involuntary and unconscious motivations, even in common and everyday situations, to protect themselves from retraumatization. Victims of sexual violence exhibit an even greater likelihood of avoidance and dissociation.

In adjudications involving torture victims, the medical certainty of the psychological effects of torture, which are often long-term and far-reaching, and the subsequent need for rehabilitation, mandates consideration of whether the psychological effects of a victim’s torture are legally significant. Whether the victim acted “knowingly” requires an examination of the voluntariness, consciousness, and intention behind the victim’s actions – and whether those actions were an involuntary, unconscious or unintentional result of trauma.

The complex task of assessing the psychological effects of torture requires expertise. The district court below excluded expert testimony of a licensed clinical psychologist and expert on the psychological symptoms and effects of torture who had evaluated Defendant-Appellant Odeh’s mental health. Where reasonable grounds exist to believe that a victim’s actions may be impacted by psychological trauma following the torture experience, a court should seek the expert assessment of mental health experts and consider all expert evidence before it.

This case should be remanded to allow the jury to hear the expert testimony and consider the impact, if any, of the expert’s evaluation of DefendantAppellant’s psychological state has on the question of whether she acted willfully or knowingly in regard to material facts at issue.

Summary

Ms. Rasmieh Yousef Odeh, the Defendant-Appellant, claims she was tortured, including sexual violence and rape. A qualified clinical psychologist diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Ms. Odeh was not allowed to present evidence at trial about her PTSD symptoms, the psychological effects of torture, and how these symptoms affected her mental state regarding the charges.

When deciding if psychological evidence can be used, the main point is whether this evidence could disprove an element of the crime. In this situation, "knowledge" or "willfulness" is a necessary element of the offense. A clinical psychologist's testimony about Ms. Odeh's mental health is clearly relevant to determining this mental state. This testimony was wrongly excluded from the trial.

Organizations like the IRCT, which treat many torture victims globally each year, and scientific research show that all torture leads to psychological effects. These effects can be long-term, widespread, and sometimes more damaging than physical injuries. The most common psychological effects are PTSD and major depression.

Extensive research from the last thirty years shows that torture victims often develop psychological symptoms and reactions, such as avoidance and dissociation, to prevent being re-traumatized. These reactions can influence a person's will regarding their actions and intentions. Such psychological reactions act as defense mechanisms, causing victims to act based on involuntary and unconscious motivations, even in everyday situations, to protect themselves from further trauma. Victims of sexual violence are even more likely to experience avoidance and dissociation.

In cases involving torture victims, the medical certainty of the long-term and widespread psychological effects of torture, and the need for rehabilitation, means that courts must consider if these effects are legally significant. To determine if a victim acted "knowingly," it is necessary to examine the voluntariness, consciousness, and intention behind their actions. This includes considering whether their actions were an involuntary, unconscious, or unintentional result of trauma.

Assessing the complex psychological effects of torture requires expert knowledge. The district court did not allow expert testimony from a licensed clinical psychologist and expert on the psychological effects of torture who had evaluated Ms. Odeh's mental health. If there are reasonable reasons to believe that a victim's actions might be influenced by psychological trauma from torture, a court should seek expert assessment from mental health professionals and consider all available expert evidence.

This case should be sent back to a lower court. This would allow the jury to hear the expert testimony and consider how the expert's evaluation of Ms. Odeh's psychological state might affect whether she acted willfully or knowingly concerning the key facts of the case.

Summary

Ms. Rasmieh Yousef Odeh, the Defendant-Appellant, claims to have been subjected to torture, including sexual violence, leading to a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by a qualified clinical psychologist. The trial court did not allow Ms. Odeh to present evidence regarding her PTSD symptoms, the psychological impact of torture, or how these symptoms affected her mental state concerning the charges against her.

When determining if psychological evidence is admissible, the key question is whether it could disprove an element of the offense. In this case, "knowledge" or "willfulness" is an essential part of the offense. A clinical psychologist's testimony about Ms. Odeh's mental health is directly relevant to establishing this mental state and was incorrectly excluded.

Organizations like the IRCT, with experience treating numerous torture victims, and scientific research confirm that torture causes significant psychological effects. These effects can be long-lasting, extensive, and often more debilitating than physical injuries. PTSD and major depression are among the most common outcomes.

Research from the past three decades shows that torture victims frequently develop psychological symptoms such as avoidance and dissociation as a way to prevent re-experiencing trauma. These responses can influence a person's will regarding their actions and intentions. Such psychological reactions are defense mechanisms that cause victims to act based on involuntary and unconscious motivations, even in everyday situations, to protect themselves from further trauma. Victims of sexual violence are even more likely to experience avoidance and dissociation.

In legal cases involving torture victims, the clear medical understanding of torture's psychological effects and the need for rehabilitation require considering the legal importance of these effects. Determining if a victim acted "knowingly" involves examining the voluntary nature, conscious awareness, and intention behind their actions, as well as whether these actions were involuntary, unconscious, or unintentional due to trauma.

Assessing the complex psychological effects of torture requires expert knowledge. The lower district court prevented expert testimony from a licensed clinical psychologist, who specialized in the psychological impact of torture and had evaluated Ms. Odeh's mental health. If there are reasonable grounds to believe a victim's actions might be affected by psychological trauma from torture, a court should seek expert assessment from mental health professionals and consider all relevant expert evidence.

This case should be sent back to the lower court. This would allow the jury to hear the expert testimony and assess how the expert's evaluation of Ms. Odeh's psychological state might influence the question of whether she acted willfully or knowingly regarding the material facts of the case.

Summary

Ms. Rasmieh Yousef Odeh, the Defendant-Appellant, claims she was tortured, including sexual violence and rape. A qualified clinical psychologist diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Ms. Odeh was not allowed to present evidence at her trial about her PTSD symptoms, the psychological impact of surviving torture, or how these symptoms affected her mental state concerning the charges against her.

When deciding if psychological evidence can be used, the main question is whether it could disprove a part of the crime. In this case, "knowledge" or "willfulness" is a necessary part of the offense. A clinical psychologist's testimony about Ms. Odeh's mental health is clearly relevant to determining her state of mind. This testimony was wrongly kept out of the trial.

Organizations like the IRCT, which treat many torture victims each year, and scientific studies confirm that all torture causes psychological effects. These effects can be long-lasting, extensive, and sometimes more damaging than physical injuries. PTSD and major depression are the most common psychological issues seen in torture survivors.

Research from the past thirty years shows that torture victims often develop psychological symptoms and responses, such as avoidance and dissociation, to prevent being re-traumatized. These responses can affect a person's free will and intentions. Such psychological reactions are defense mechanisms that cause victims to act based on involuntary and unconscious impulses, even in everyday situations, to protect themselves from further trauma. Victims of sexual violence are even more likely to experience avoidance and dissociation.

In cases involving torture victims, the clear medical understanding of torture's psychological effects, which are often long-term and widespread, and the need for rehabilitation, demand that courts consider if these psychological effects are legally important. To determine if a victim acted "knowingly," there must be an examination of whether their actions were voluntary, conscious, and intentional, or if they were involuntary, unconscious, or unintentional results of trauma.

Assessing the complex psychological effects of torture requires expert knowledge. The district court prevented an expert, a licensed clinical psychologist who specialized in the psychological symptoms and effects of torture and had evaluated Ms. Odeh's mental health, from testifying. When there is good reason to believe that a victim's actions might be influenced by psychological trauma after being tortured, a court should seek the assessment of mental health experts and consider all expert evidence presented.

This case should be sent back to a lower court to allow the jury to hear the expert testimony. The jury should consider how the expert's evaluation of Ms. Odeh's psychological state might impact the question of whether she acted willfully or knowingly regarding the important facts of the case.

Summary

Ms. Rasmieh Yousef Odeh, the person on trial, says she was hurt badly, including sexual violence. A doctor who studies the mind said she has a condition called PTSD because of this. Ms. Odeh was not allowed to tell the court about her PTSD, how torture affected her mind, or how these problems might have changed her actions related to the charges against her.

When deciding if facts about the mind can be used in court, the main question is if these facts could show that the person did not mean to do something wrong. In this case, the court needed to know if Ms. Odeh acted with purpose or knew what she was doing. A doctor's words about her mind would clearly help decide this. But the court did not allow this.

Many groups that help people who have been hurt, like the IRCT, see that torture always hurts a person's mind. This can last a long time and cause more pain than physical injuries. The most common problems are PTSD and feeling very sad.

Studies over the past 30 years show that people who are tortured often try to avoid things or feel disconnected to stop bad memories from coming back. These reactions can change how a person acts and what they mean to do. They can make people do things without thinking or without meaning to, even in normal life, to keep themselves safe from bad memories. People who have faced sexual violence are even more likely to avoid things or feel disconnected.

When courts deal with people who have been tortured, it is clear that torture deeply affects their minds, often for a long time. They need help to get better. So, courts must think about if these mind problems change how the law sees what the person did. To know if someone acted "knowingly," the court needs to look at if their actions were done on purpose, with thought, and with clear intent. Or, if their actions were not on purpose, not thought out, or not meant to happen because of the trauma.

It is hard to understand how torture affects a person's mind, and it needs expert help. The court did not let a trained mind doctor, who knows a lot about how torture affects people and who looked at Ms. Odeh's mind, speak in court. If there is a good reason to think that what a person did might be because of the deep hurt from torture, the court should ask mind doctors for their opinions and listen to all they have to say.

This case should go back to court so that the jury can hear what the expert doctor has to say. Then, the jury can decide if what the doctor says about Ms. Odeh's mind changes whether she acted with purpose or knew what she was doing.