Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Justice of differential treatment? Sentencing of offenders with an intellectual disability
- Author:
- COCKRAM Judith
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 30(1), March 2005, pp.3-13.
- Publisher:
- Taylor and Francis
This article reports on court outcomes for people with an intellectual disability in comparison with other offenders in Western Australia. It is part of a longitudinal study where it was possible to examine all levels of the criminal justice system, from arrest to court appearance and finally to conviction. The study is based on the summation of nearly 11 years of data, from 1 April 1984 to 31 December 1994. Using comprehensive databases, a group of 843 offenders with intellectual disability were “tracked” through the criminal justice system to assess their criminal history and compared with a cohort of 2,442 general population offenders. The findings show that there was no difference between the two groups in the proportion who were convicted, however, there were considerable disparities between groups for the types of penalties imposed. The article concludes that the initial police decision to charge seems to have an enduring, albeit indirect effect at the final stage of disposition.
People with an intellectual disability and the criminal justice system: the family perspective
- Authors:
- COCKRAM Judith, JACKSON Robert, UNDERWOOD Rod
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 23(1), March 1998, pp.41-56.
- Publisher:
- Taylor and Francis
People with an intellectual disability generally are over represented in the justice system. This study seeks to understand how these offenders are disadvantaged by the judicial processes from the perspective of the family carers. Results found that family carers expressed concern for the lack of sentencing options available to the judiciary there was general agreement that the level of services available to support offenders with an intellectual disability was inadequate. Argues that these offenders must be supported by legal representation from the earliest stages of the process.