The Patricia Hearst case was an example illustrating how expert testimony helped to portray Patty Hearst as both the victim and the villain in her story. This allowed the jury, as well as the public, to observe psychology being utilized in a manner opposite of the preconceived notion of helping the criminal get away with their crime. The expert testimony helped to show that while Patty Hearst had valid reasons for her actions, those reasons did not fully excuse her actions. Patty Hearst’s lawyer attempted to use a defense of duress or coercion. This is not a typical defense, but when utilized the facts usually speak for themselves and tell a story of a person forced to commit a crime against their will. However, in Patty’s case her actions