Trastornos mentales y responsabilidad criminal en incendiarios

Resumen

Introducción

Los objetivos del estudio son describir a acusados del delito de incendio en las dimensiones demográfica, psiquiátrica y criminológica y explorar factores asociados a la opinión pericial de inimputabilidad.

Material y métodos

Se describe la serie de casos acusados de incendio y evaluados pericialmente (N = 197) en la Unidad de Psiquiatría de Adultos del Servicio Médico Legal de Chile, durante el periodo 1999-2012 y con diseño de casos y controles se exploran factores asociados con la opinión de inimputabilidad.

Resultados

La serie de casos tuvo alta prevalencia de problemas sociales, familiares y de trastornos mentales. En el 52,3% se alcanzó conclusión pericial compatible con la imputabilidad, en el 24,4% con la inimputabilidad y en el 23,3% con la imputabilidad disminuida.

Conclusiones

Las condiciones de inimputabilidad e imputabilidad disminuidas, agrupadas como «opinión pericial de imputabilidad comprometida» se asociaron significativamente a la verificación de conducta bizarra, motivación patológica, motivación afectiva, autolesiones y actitud colaboradora del acusado.

Abstract

Introduction

The purpose of the study is to describe arsonists in their demographic, psychiatric and criminological dimensions and to explore factors associated with the expert opinion of insanity.

Material and methods

A series of cases accused of arson and assessed in the adult Psychiatric Unit of the Legal Medical Service of Chile, during the period 1999-2012 (N = 197) is described. With a cases and controls design, the factors associated with the opinion of insanity are explored.

Results

The series of cases had a high prevalence of mental disorders, social and family problems. Expert opinion compatible with the condition of criminal responsibility was achieved in 52.3% of the cases; and in 24.4% it was compatible with insanity and in 23.3% with diminished criminal responsibility.

Conclusions

The conditions of insanity and diminished criminal responsibility, grouped together as “expert opinion of altered criminal responsibility” were significantly associated with bizarre behavior, pathological motivation, emotional motivation, self-harm and cooperative attitude of the accused.