Developmentally disabled offenders: A law enforcement perspective

This study examined the attitudes of police officers regarding the credibility and capability of developmentally disabled offenders. This study also examined police officer's general knowledge regarding individuals with developmental disabilities, as well as their perceptions regarding the treatment of individuals with developmental disabilities in the criminal justice system. Police officers (n = 90) from the Los Angeles and Bakersfield, California area police departments completed questionnaires that assessed the aforementioned variables and were then compared to responses of participants from the general population (n = 90).; The analyses revealed mixed results in support of hypotheses that police officers would have more favorable attitudes than would the general public towards an alleged offender identified as having a developmental disability. The police officer respondents appeared to be less likely to believe the report of an alleged offender with a developmental disability than were respondents from the general population. Police officers also found the developmentally disabled offender to be less credible than the nondisabled offender.; The results of this study indicated that police officers perceived developmentally disabled offenders to be capable to a greater extent than did respondents from the general public, confirming a study hypothesis. The general public viewed developmentally disabled offenders to be less capable than nondisabled offenders in responding to questions about the offense should the case go to trial. Surprisingly, the results indicated that police officers viewed the developmentally disabled offender to be more capable than the nondisabled offender.; This study also indicated that police officers agree to a greater extent than the general public the following: "You can tell that a person is mentally retarded by their appearance," "Individuals with mental retardation do not lie," and "Individuals with mental retardation should get the same treatment as nondisabled individuals in the criminal justice system."; The clinical and public policy implications of these study results are presented and discussed. Additionally, study limitations, particularly with respect to self-report attitudinal measures and the vignette format are reviewed. Finally, areas for future research are suggested.