If you are autistic and are arrested under suspicion of committing a crime, your rights are protected. Questions on arrival at the police station will reveal that you have special needs, even if it is not obvious, and you will be entitled to access to an appropriate adult or social worker and a solicitor.
In order for you to be charged, the police must be satisfied you had the necessary intent to commit the crime in question or that you understood the consequences of your actions. Every case has to be judged individually.
Some autism sufferers have been exploited by criminals, and some are fully aware of the implications of their actions. As a suspect, the chances are that your special needs will be recognised and properly dealt with.
It is, however, as victims that autistic people are ill-served. As a victim you might receive help from many quarters, but that help stops at the doors of the court. Even if societal prejudice against giving equal weight to the evidence of those with disabilities can be overcome, autistic victims still have to face the onslaught of the defence. In a recent case of alleged sexual abuse by a family member, the autistic victim had to endure nearly two hours of aggressive cross-examination, all of it in double-negative questions. He could not cope and the case was thrown out.
How does that serve justice? The legal profession believes that evidence must be "tested". I agree, but test the evidence, not the individual. People with special needs have exactly that, and they should be treated in a manner that reflects those needs.
I have an eight-year-old child who is autistic, and I know how the system works. If he were ever to be a victim, I would make sure he never went to court to give evidence. The experience would be too traumatic: I would never allow the hurt and bewilderment to be made worse by exposure to a system that would not protect him.
- Got something to say in Soapbox? stovin.hayter@haynet com or 020 8267 4767.
