Applying Artificial Intelligence © 5GL Software, Australia The Psycholegal Personality (draft, only summary presented, needs much input from psychiatrists in particular those familiar with psychiatric criminal behaviour; the Alzheimer's Scam report a pre-requisive study)

What is the difference between a psychopath and a liar? Between a psychopath who is a solicitor and other psychopaths? Is a solicitor always a psychopath?

In most countries the lower courts are not about the intent of laws but their literal understanding. That means no ethics or morals or right or wrong - no conscience in simple words - of any kind is used in legal deliberations. By definition, this is a psychopath mentality. The problem is that medical science knows that in psychopaths brain activity differs in certain areas. Problem is that a person who is a lawyer or who is prone to 1-dimensional legal reasoning, it may not be possible to define such a person as a psychopath by existing clinical definitions.

The psycholegal personality is prone to delusions, ideals of reference, and an illusion of grandeur and invincibility. What makes these people incredibly dangerous to others, dangers in the sense of what they are capable of, is that these people know very well the limited and often incompetent nature of junior courts.

And yet, to understand this type of personality opens the way to come to grips with legal scams before they take root in reality.

The basic nature of a legal scam is simple. You need lots of money to pay a legal firm. With their guidance, you design a plan which results in some kind of court order against your mark. Once you have this, and well before any hearing, you begin spreading malicious and factitious rumours about that person or members of their family. For example, in the Alzheimer's Scam report, it is mentioned that Mr R White told one magistrate every member of Mr A White's family has a gambling problem. This was so convincing coming from a true psychopath but this applies to a psycholegal personality, that a magistrate ordered all these bank records. Nothing was found but this does not alter the fact that enormous malice was generated, so much so other magistrates - human nature being human nature - went out of their way to try and pretend the initial interim court order had any merit whatsoever.

In other words, a legal scam begins with a fabrication and lots of money to a magistrate direct or to a legal firm. Armed with such a court order, the psycholegal personality now begins to shape reality to suit his or her intent. Example. While about twenty members of Mrs J White's family would say outright Mr R White is a "lunatic" and highly dangerous, Mr R White gets a social worker whom he pays to sit with Mrs J White, to give him a glowing report how well he looks after Mrs J White. In a 1-dimensional legal mentality, that piece of paper is the "reality". The family members are not even called to give any evidence.

How do you get a medical doctor to give Mr R White a report stating that Mrs J White "has testament capacity"? In Australia many doctors are from outside the country and often from impoverished  countries and speak English poorly. It is possible such a doctor is simply told this is the proper way such information is presented. What "testament capacity" means, to my knowledge, has no meaning in medicine whatsoever - but it sounds "persuasive". In addition, I have come across some physicians who seem to think you can use some kind of mental status examination to determine "testament capacity" - even though no medical source I am familiar with mentions anything of this kind. However, there are other ways to get to a hospital doctor. Money is one way but that is probably the last resort. Instead, lie after lie which is convincing and presented with seemingly "authoritative persons", especially armed with a court order naming an old disabled and demented women as "protected", is persuasive enough for many doctors who are not experienced specialists. Once you have this, you make sure you do not allow any other medical doctor to examine this person. Again, 1-dimensional thinking is what you focused on, not truth, facts, reality.

So, at what point is a person with a psychiatric disorder but who knows how to manipulate the legal system, pronounced as "insane" in a sense? Medicine does not have a clear answer to this. The first step could be to define a Psycholegal personality.

By definition, we may suggest, every lawyer develops a psycholegal personality. Not so. The features of a psycholegal personality are likely these:-

- wins most of his or her cases. The reason is that this person will fabricate and invent evidence, and will always focus on the 1-dimensional reality of courts. Regardless of truth or reality, this type of personality gathers "evidence" that presents the view the person wants presented. Anything to obtain this is acceptable to such a person.
- is unlikely to be able to sustain a personal relationship for any length of time
- is not afraid of being seen to be involved in direct fraud. This type of personality becomes an expert on 1-dimensional thinking of junior courts and knows exactly what you need, and how to lie, to come across as convincing and credible.
- like a true psychopath, this type will harm anyone who comes across his way, harm in whatever technique is "safest" so he himself is not blamed; this type will invent and lie and fabricate evidence and can come across as ever so convincing when he lies or presents half truths
- ideally, this person will try to "fix" something to see anyone who interferes with his or her plans in "prison".

Why is this important? The simple fact is that most legal sytems are prohibitively expensive and most people can not use any of the superior courts because they can not afford this. To assist change in society, I believe it is important for medicine to understand the different mental conditions that can affect those into law or who study law. Law can be said to be an acceptable  "fixation" and "delusion" with "frames of reference" by definition. That is what it equates to. A psycholegal personality is prone to forming fixations and delusions while studying law. How does a psychiatrist know the difference between a "fixation" and someone who says" but this is what the law says"? The latter can be a mask, a cover, for a delusion or fixation. The latter are mental illnesses - so is the former if the true reason is in fact the latter. Ecxcept no studies that I know have tried to work out how to clinically differentiate between a mental illness to do with fixations and delusions and obcessions - and someone with a psycholegal personalilty who is riddled with these but these are justified and explained away in terms of legal points or precedents or the like.