Abstract
This article discusses the inception (in 1955) and history of the inclusion of the summary mental examination in criminal proceedings. It then reviews the procedures for diagnosing easily diagnosed cases such as frank psychosis or obvious mental normality. An overview is then provided of the manner in which the reliability of the summary examination can be maintained by deeming those cases where diagnosis can be made without the use of suggestive questions as “easily diagnosed cases”and by avoiding positively diagnosing obvious mental normality. The importance of ensuring that test proceedings in summary examinations do not interfere with formal forensic psychiatric examinations that may be conducted later is then reviewed. These proceedings, through the summary examination, provide material for an expert to state an opinion in court as to the criminal responsibility of the accused suspect.
