Media Center

Weighing Up the Depravity of Evil

By Jani Meyer

The Sunday Tribune, November 19, 2006

DELANI - Chala attacked his 3-year-old niece with a panga, cut her into pieces, roasted a slice of flesh from her thigh on an open fire and ate it.

After his arrest, Chala was sent to five different psychologists, all of whom found him fit to stand trial.

He was convicted of murder with aggravating circumstances for the death of Vuyokazi Nbewane, and was sentenced to 18 years in jail.

When the judge asked him why he did it, Chala replied he wanted to have "braaied meat".

His actions could be described as evil, heinous or depraved - terms often used by judges during sentencing. However, there is no measure of the extent of evil.

A few hundred years ago depraved behaviour was sometimes blamed on evil forces, but modern psychiatry dismisses the notion of evil.

Evil is defined as something that is morally wrong and often associated with the devil, but in contemporary society criminally deprived acts are seen as the result of psychological conditions like psychopathy, sadism and anti-social personality.

However, an American professor of psychiatry believes that evil should not be dismissed by legal and psychiatric establishments.

Prof Michael Welner from the New York University School of Medicine is developing a "depravity scale" to be used as a benchmark to measure the "worst of the worst" crimes.

The Depravity Standard will be used as a framework for judges or juries to "weigh" the extent of depravity involved in the crime. The scale will scientifically standardise the definition of legal terms such as "heinous", "atrocious", "evil" and "depraved".

Although the scale is designed to assist the US jury system, Welner said it could be applied in other countries.

He has invited South Africans to take part in the project.

"The standard is meant to guide decision-makers, to help them take into account the intent, action and attitude that define a crime, and to give weight to the priorities of the community.

"The judge makes the sentence, but the judge has more depth to reflect on the significance of the crime," said Welner.

Although evil is not a scientifically recognised condition, it is often used as a criminal sentencing code to distinguish crimes that warrant severe sentences.

Welner said while evil must not be ignored, it was the crime that would be measured and not the perpetrator.

Diagnoses

"That is, it will judge the 'what' of a crime, as opposed to the 'who' or the 'why'. The scale will not take diagnoses like antisocial personality and psychopathy into account, as courts have systems with which to lower criminal responsibility if a defendant is seriously ill or disadvantaged.

"The Depravity Standard focuses on what a person did, rather than who he is."

Welner said that in his field it had become obvious that some crimes were more depraved than others and should be treated differently.

"We experience cases with such proximity that we cannot possibly ignore that some murders are more heinous than others, some sexual assaults more heinous than others, even some property crimes more heinous than others.

"There has to be more nuances to accountability," said Welner.

Despite this, very few forensic psychiatrists want to touch the potentially controversial issue.

"In 2001 no one in forensic psychiatry wanted to engage the issue, even though their responsibility is for accounting for, and defusing, the worst behaviour.

"It reminded me of the plastic surgeon who refuses to take patients who are too disfigured. To me, psychiatry has shied away from this area because of its own emotional and sensory discomfort when faced with the worst of the worst.

"I concluded that were I to pioneer such an inquiry, others would follow in my footsteps, and that if I did not, the area would continue to be avoided," said Welner.

He also believes that psychiatry has a responsibility to engage the issue of "everyday evil".

"This is that which does not involve criminal transgression, but causes or promotes terrible consequences or decline in others.

"As we mental health professionals denote 'suicidal' and homicidal' thinking and actions as alarms necessitating clinical intervention, so too should we develop clinical criteria.

"When we see them in patients, we are compelled to defuse those qualities because we recognise how pernicious they are to others, either intimates, children, or others in the community," said Welner.

Welner describes evil as what one does, not who one is.

"The more evil one does, the more evil one becomes. Evil is distinguished by its perversity in plan, its horror in action and its banality in reflection.

Religion

"The disturbing motives for acts of evil co-exist with an absence of humanity in those carrying out the crimes. And so evil is both about the presence of something and the absence of something," said Welner.

Even though "evil" is not a scientifically accepted concept, but is rather rooted in religion and culture, Welner said societies had to incorporate their cultural values into laws, or they would remain lawless.

"Theology confronts many things, including laws. Religious law is not binding on the state, even when it inspires constructs of morality.

"Common law co-exists peacefully with religious law - and in some countries, common law is religious law.

"The Depravity Standard aims to contribute to the linkage of cultural benchmarks with decisions about accountability," said Welner.

Welner, who is in Nuremberg filming a series on the Nazi war crimes trials, said the scale could be used in international tribunals and African courts.

"Those advancing fairness in justice across the continent have every bit as much to benefit from science advances that embed cultural preferences in the law," said Welner.