When the competency evaluation results are disputed by different experts, it can lead to a complex situation in the legal proceedings. This can occur when different forensic psychologists conduct separate evaluations and arrive at different conclusions about the defendant’s competency.

In such cases, the court may consider several factors. First, the court will review the methods used by each evaluator, including the psychological tests administered and the thoroughness of the interviews conducted. The court may also consider the qualifications and experience of the evaluators.

If there is a significant disagreement between experts, the court may order additional evaluations to be conducted. These additional evaluations can provide more information and help the court make a more informed decision.

It’s important to note that the final determination of competence is typically made by a judge, based on the evidence presented¹. Therefore, even if experts disagree, the judge will make the final decision based on all the evidence, including the competency evaluations and other relevant information.

This underscores the importance of rigorous, objective, and thorough evaluations by forensic psychologists. Despite the potential for disagreement, research indicates that forensic evaluators generally show high levels of agreement on the ultimate issue of a defendant’s competence. However, high levels of reliability do not ensure that valid decisions are being made, highlighting the complexity and nuanced nature of competency evaluations in the legal system¹.