The principal aim of this study was to investigate whether attitudes towards judicial competency, legal liability, voluntariness of offence and judicial disposal options were influenced by known classification of an offender as learning disabled compared to an offender with a suggested intellectual disability, but not formally classified. Subsidiary aims were to explore participant attitudes based upon group membership and parental status. The sample consisted of 101 participants (69 undergraduate nursing students and 32 from the general population). Participants were requested to complete a questionnaire assessing their attitudes within the aforementioned domains and towards ascribed levels of victim parental responsibility. Fifty participants completed a questionnaire designed for the purpose of the study where the offence scenario depicted made reference to the offender having a formal classification of learning disability. Fifty-one participants completed the same questionnaire where an intellectual disability was suggested but not formally stated in the form of classification. Results indicated that classification did significantly influence attitudes in most domains irrespective of group. The nursing group attributed greater levels of competency to the offenders depicted. No interactions between variables were observed. The reasons for and implications of these findings, limitations and recommendations for future research are explored.