The challenge of assessing credibility when children with intellectual disabilities are alleged victims of abuse

Ann-Christin Cederborg,Clara H Gumpert

doi:10.1080/15017410902909134

Ann-Christin Cederborg, Clara H Gumpert

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410902909134

Copy DOI

Abstract

Abstract Assessing credibility is of importance when deciding the legal outcome of a case. Such an assessment can be especially challenging when the witness is a child with intellectual disabilities. If these children have difficulties making their voices heard in legal proceedings the principal of equal legal rights may be called in question. We openly interviewed 32 lawyers, prosecutors, and police officers about how they assess credibility of these children. The findings indicate that individual perceptions of credibility are filtered through a legal norm of how to understand reliable reports irrespective of the eyewitnesses' ability to reach that standard. Legal representatives are aware that such a procedure may exclude intellectual disabled children from being fairly assessed but they do not deviate from the rules they perceive as required by their legal role. If knowledge about intellectual competence and functional level of an individual child witness was perceived as necessary when putting an ada...

Highlights

Children with intellectual disabilities are more likely than typically developed children to be maltreated or victimized by crime (Sedlack and Broadhurst 1996; Sobsey and Doe 1991; Sullivan and Knutson 2000; Westcott and Jones 1999; Vig and Kaminer 2002) and few cases involving intellectually disabled children are taken to court (Gudjonsson, Murphy, and Clare 2000; Green 2001; Williams 1995)
The results are organized under four themes: legal position of children with intellectual disabilities; legal representations of credibility; competence within the legal system; and competence outside the legal system
The view that alleged child victims have a weak position in the legal system is illustrated in the following examples: Judge Excerpt 1 from the disabled children’s perspective this demand is sometimes impossible to fulfil when they cannot give a coherent, clear and detailed report

Summary

Introduction

Children with intellectual disabilities are more likely than typically developed children to be maltreated or victimized by crime (Sedlack and Broadhurst 1996; Sobsey and Doe 1991; Sullivan and Knutson 2000; Westcott and Jones 1999; Vig and Kaminer 2002) and few cases involving intellectually disabled children are taken to court (Gudjonsson, Murphy, and Clare 2000; Green 2001; Williams 1995). The courts must distinguish between credible and non-credible reports Such an assessment can be especially challenging when the witness is diagnosed with intellectual disabilities especially because it is not possible. Few researchers have examined the way different professionals in the legal systems respond to children with intellectual disabilities who are victims of crime (Agnew and Powell 2004; Milne 1999). Cederborg and Lamb (2006) found, that written or verbal testimony from experts was seldom available or adequate when cases involving children with intellectual disabilities were taken to court. In order to further understand how children with intellectual disabilities are treated when they are allegedly victimized this study wanted to find out how legal representatives perceive credibility when children with intellectual disabilities are alleged child witnesses

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion