People with learning disabilities as witnesses in court: What questions should lawyers ask?

Abstract

Summary People with learning disabilities (LDs) are likely to be at greater risk of having crimes committed against them, and testimony from witnesses with LDs is likely to be crucial when many of these crimes are prosecuted. The present authors analysed the transcripts of 16 court cases involving witnesses with LDs and 16 matched court cases involving witnesses without LDs. On the basis of this information and previous research, they discuss three issues: (1) the strengths and vulnerabilities of people with LDs as witnesses in court; (2) the kinds of questioning used by lawyers in courtrooms which can cause problems for witnesses with LDs; and (3) guidance for practitioners concerning alerting the judge to their role in preventing constraining and coercive lawyer questioning in court. The authors conclude that many people with LDs can be competent witnesses in court, but that hostile lawyers in particular use constraining and coercive questioning strategies which have a particularly negative impact on the testimony of witnesses with LDs. Judges should be informed of appropriate and inappropriate lawyer questioning strategies in advance of trials to enable them to effectively manage the questioning of lawyers in the courtroom.

Parental negotiations of the moral terrain of risk in relation to young people with intellectual disabilities

“…For example, they are at a comparatively higher risk of serious pedestrian accidents, falls, fire and drowning (Strauss et al, 1998;Tomson et al, 2004). Others have highlighted an increased risk of criminal victimization (Kebbell et al, 2001) and of other forms of abuse (Fyson and Kitson, 2007). In any discussion about the risks PWIDs are subjected to, we are aware that some would see this as a 'victim-blaming' approach which is not our intention.…”

Cross-Examination of Sexual Assault Complainants: A Developmental Comparison

“…Adults, like children, are vulnerable to the way in which a question is worded (Kebbell, Hatton, Johnson, & O'Kelly, 2001;Poole & White, 1991;Pratt, 1990;Waterman, Blades, & Spencer, 2001). Even very subtle changes in the wording of a question can alter adults' responses (Loftus & Zanni, 1975).…”

Qualitative research interviews of children with communication disorders: methodological implications

“…The nature and degree of deficiency must be known and taken into account by the researcher in so far as they influence the way the person will be able to take part in the interview (Kebbell et al 2001;Fujino and YuKumi 2003;Guillemette and Boisvert 2003;D'eath and National Federation Research Sub-Commitee Members 2005;Brodin 2009;Julien-Gauthier, Jourdan-Ionescu, and Heroux 2009;Picon 2009;Galien 2010).…”