Pathways for Offenders with Intellectual Disabilities

Missing out: offenders with learning disabilities and the criminal justice system

“…There should be clear criteria for release, and avoidance of indeterminate sentences (either formal or informal). It is iniquitous if the individual participating in a diversionary option encounters additional barriers to release, including the situation where the person has to ‘prove’ that they have a negligible risk of re‐offending (Hayes 2004, 2005b).…”

Risk Assessment in Intellectually Disabled Offenders: Validation of the Suggested ID Supplement to the HCR-20

“…Risk assessments are generally based on formally recorded offenses, consisting of charges and convictions . Once support services are involved, significant incidents may not be reported to the police or the CJS (Jones, 2004) or the individual may be found not guilty through the court system (Hayes, 2004). Studies of recidivism in the field of ID have therefore routinely include all recorded incidents in their reoffending data; that is, in addition to charges and convictions, incidents that are not reported to the police are examined Quinsey et al, 2004).…”

“…Offenders with ID are at a particular disadvantage within the CJS, due to a risk of victimization and a lack of specialized services (Hayes, 2004;Jones, 2004;Simpson, Martin, & Green, 2001). This lack of appropriate services heightens the risk of reoffending and reincarceration, which creates concerns regarding system fairness, community safety, and government cost (New South Wales Council for ID, 2007).…”

Persons With Intellectual Disabilities in the Criminal Justice System

“…The inappropriateness and ineffectiveness of traditional therapeutic approaches and mainstream criminal justice interventions for individuals with ID is widely acknowledged. A common dilemma identified is that people with ID who have offended, or who are at risk of offending, may be rejected by mainstream services as being too difficult and awkward to treat, and may also be rejected by developmental services as being too able or presenting too great a risk to others in the service (Hayes, 2004;Holland, 2001;Murphy, 2000).…”