Sexual Offences in Police Reports and Court Dossiers: A Case‐File Study

Abstract

Background In many cases, sexual abuse involving a person with an intellectual disability (ID; as a victim and/or as a perpetrator) is not reported to the police. There are very few studies addressing police procedures in these cases, and even fewer addressing procedures at the Public Prosecutor level. The present study had two goals: (i) to describe relevant characteristics of cases of sexual abuse, involving people with ID (as a victim or perpetrator), that were either reported to the police or sent to the Public Prosecutor; (ii) to describe the dynamics of the process from making the report to passing the sentence. Method In this case‐file research, 75 police reports and dossiers at the Public Prosecutor, regarding sexual abuse were followed from the initial report to the police, up to the conviction. Results Even if a case was reported to the police, it did not always go forward to the Public Prosecutor and when a person with ID was involved as the perpetrator, few were actually convicted. Conclusions Whether the perpetrator had an ID did not appear to be a decisive factor in furnishing proof or in the conviction. There seemed to be no evidence for any specific disability‐related influence on the judicial process in cases against perpetrators of sexual abuse. Differentiating police data from court data, however, revealed an important finding. Relatives appeared in court dossiers far more than in police files (34% versus 14%), while on the contrary staff made up 24% in police files and only 13% in court dossiers. This suggested that different sensitivities, protecting staff compared with relatives, may be present in the judicial process, rather than in services.

Interviewing alleged victims with mild and moderate intellectual disabilities and autism: A field study of police‐investigated cases of physical and sexual abuse in a Norwegian national sample

“…In general, the findings reveal that the majority of victims were female in their early twenties and were victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by someone they knew. These findings are similar to those of other studies in the field; Van Den Bergh and Hoekman (2006) found that the majority of victims in their study were female in their twenties who were alleged victims of sexual abuse. PWID's vulnerability to being sexually exploited regardless of gender was also reported by Nixon et al (2017).…”

“…Studies have furthermore compared questioning strategies used for children and concluded that these are recommendable for PWID and PWA regardless of age (Lamb et al 2018b). There are more criminal cases within the criminal justice system that involve adult than child victims with disabilities (Van Den Bergh and Hoekman 2006;Nixon et al 2017). We therefore require more knowledge of how adults with disabilities are questioned in investigative interviews.…”

Sexual abuse and violence against people with intellectual disability and physical impairments: Characteristics of police‐investigated cases in a Norwegian national sample

“…Similar findings were reported in studies that analyse the relationship between victim and suspect. For example, a Dutch study conducted by Van Den Bergh and Hoekman () reports two‐fifths of suspects being a friend or acquaintance. A study from the United States also reports that someone the victim knew well conducted 40% of crimes against people with intellectual disabilities (Harrell, ).…”

“…The call for more research about the judicial process involving victims with disabilities is still applicable, but access to information within the criminal justice system has repeatedly been discussed as a reason for the lack of studies within this area (Cederborg & Lamb, ; Fry, Lannen, Vanderminden, Cameron, & Casey, ; Hughes et al, ; Jones et al, ; Murphy et al, ; Olafson, ). The limited access to information can lead to methodological challenges such as described in a study conducted by Van Den Bergh and Hoekman (). In their study, where the aim was to describe the judicial process in sexual offence cases, the sampling procedure was dependent on a manual screening of files.…”

“…In their study, where the aim was to describe the judicial process in sexual offence cases, the sampling procedure was dependent on a manual screening of files. Van Den Bergh and Hoekman () explained the use of a selective sampling procedure because of missing information about victims with disability in the police regions. Likewise, Cederborg and Lamb () reported similar explanations with sampling due to missing information in their study concerning the legal system and victimization of people with disabilities in Sweden.…”