Intellectual disabilities and offending behaviour: the awareness and concerns of the police, district attorneys and judges

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine the awareness of intellectual disabilities (ID) amongst professionals in the criminal justice system (CJS) and their knowledge of those persons, either as victims, witnesses, suspects, accused or defendants. Design/methodology/approach -A survey of the professionals in the CJS (n ¼ 388), combined with a series of focus group interviews with experienced professionals (n ¼ 20), was conducted. Findings -One out of three respondents (police, district attorneys and judges) reported that they have regular contact with suspects who have an ID. Differences in knowledge of ID amongst professionals in the CJS can explain awareness and detection of persons with ID.Research limitations/implications -Non-responders may represent professionals with no knowledge or less interest in these issues. Originality/value -Reflections on ID have not previously been studied in the Norwegian CJS. The findings serve as a basis and status quo for further research.

Personal and sexual boundaries: The experiences of people with intellectual disabilities

“…Her former viewpoint may be explained by the criminal justice system giving more attention to offenders than victims. This may also be re ected in the research (29), where the criminal justice system reported twice the number of alleged offenders with intellectual disabilities compared to victims with the same diagnosis.…”

“…Another Norwegian study looking at cases investigated by the police found that 71.2 % of victims with intellectual disabilities were females and that 30 % of these cases led to a penal sanction (28). A study by Søndenaa, Olsen (29) found that the criminal justice system respondents observed intellectual disability twice as often in suspects compared with victims. The study results (29) showed that all professional parties (police, state attorneys and jurors) reported more frequent contact with suspects with intellectual disabilities than with victims or witnesses with the same diagnosis.…”

“…A study by Søndenaa, Olsen (29) found that the criminal justice system respondents observed intellectual disability twice as often in suspects compared with victims. The study results (29) showed that all professional parties (police, state attorneys and jurors) reported more frequent contact with suspects with intellectual disabilities than with victims or witnesses with the same diagnosis. These results may be explained by the fact that the criminal justice system has better identi cation routines for, and more contact with, the suspects than the victims of sexual abuse (29).…”

Personal and sexual boundaries: the experiences of people with intellectual disabilities

“…Another Norwegian study looking at cases investigated by the police found that 71.2% of victims with intellectual disabilities were females and that 30% of these cases led to a penal sanction [ 34 ]. A study by Søndenaa, Olsen [ 35 ] concluded that intellectual disability was detected twice as often in suspects compared with victims in the criminal justice system. The study results showed that all professional parties (police, state attorneys and jurors) reported more frequent contact with suspects with intellectual disabilities than with victims or witnesses with intellectual disabilities.…”

“…The study results showed that all professional parties (police, state attorneys and jurors) reported more frequent contact with suspects with intellectual disabilities than with victims or witnesses with intellectual disabilities. These results may be explained by the fact that the criminal justice system has more contact with suspects of sexual assault with intellectual disabilities, than victims with intellectual disabilities [ 35 ].…”