LIFE WITHOUT BARRIERS ABN 15 101 252 171

352 King Street Newcastle NSW 2300 • P 02 4033 4500 • F 02 4927 5113 • info@lwb.org.au • www.lwb.org.au

16th September 2011 The Executive Officer Law Reform Committee Parliament of Victoria Submission via email: vplrc@parliament.vic.gov.au Dear Dr Koops,

Re: Inquiry into access and interaction with the Justice System by people with an intellectual disability and their families and carers

Thankyou for providing Life Without Barriers the opportunity to make a submission to the above Inquiry. Please find enclosed our response in reference to a number of the terms of reference of the inquiry. About Life Without Barriers Life Without Barriers is a not-for-profit, non-government organisation committed to challenging systemic disadvantage and supporting vulnerable and marginalised people to reach their potential. We provide safe, stable and loving homes to vulnerable children and young people who cannot live with their families. We work with people with a disability, their families and carers to break down social exclusion and support them to engage meaningfully with their communities. We work assertively to form relationships with people who are homeless, and leverage these relationships to link people with housing, health, education and employment and turn their lives around. We work with people with a mental illness to promote and foster their recovery and help them to lead full and happy lives. We provide support and protection to children and young people who arrive in Australia seeking asylum without a parent or guardian. Please contact Kristie Brown, National Manager Research and Public Policy on 02 9508 4133 or Kristie.Brown@lwb.org.au for further information about this submission. Kind regards,

Mark Zentgraf State Director Victoria Life Without Barriers

LIFE WITHOUT BARRIERS ABN 15 101 252 171

352 King Street Newcastle NSW 2300 • P 02 4033 4500 • F 02 4927 5113 • info@lwb.org.au • www.lwb.org.au

Life Without Barriers submission to

Parliament of Victoria Law Reform Committee

Inquiry into access to and interaction with the Justice System by people with an intellectual disability and their families and carers.

Introduction People with Intellectual disability are over-represented in the Justice system, both as victims and perpetrators of crime1. People with intellectual disability are almost three times more likely than those without a disability to be victims of physical assault, sexual assault and robbery2. People with intellectual disability face a number of vulnerabilities in their interactions with the justice system. The justice system experiences difficulties in dealing with issues relevant to people with an Intellectual Disability including inexperience in interviewing victims, a hesitance in pursing allegations made, issues concerning competence and the stigma around disabilities3. Additionally, many crimes against people with Intellectual Disability may also go unreported due to an inability to interpret the victimisation as exploitation or as a result of fear in reporting the crime4. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities outlines that:

States Parties shall ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations, in order to facilitate their effective role as direct and indirect participants, including as witnesses, in all legal proceedings, including at investigative and other preliminary stages5

1 NSW Law Reform Commission 1996, People with an Intellectual Disability and the Criminal Justice System:

Crime and people with an Intellectual Disability, Report 80. Accessed online: http://www.ipc.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/R80TOC (16/9/2011) 2 Wilson, C., Nettelbeck, T., Potter, R. And Perry, C. 1996, Intellectual Disability and Criminal Victimisation,

Australian Institute of Criminology: Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 60. Accessed online: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/F/6/A/%7BF6ADE95F-EAC7-458F-8AB9-42E455CA52E1%7Dti60.pdf (16/09/2011) 3 Hayes, Susan 2006, ‘People with intellectual disabilities as victims of crime – the police and judicial response,’

Paper presented at the 39th

Annual conference of the Australasian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability, November 2004, Adelaide SA. Accessed online: http://www.qcjc.com.au/research/download/5/research/police-powers-responsibilities-1/victims-police-and-judicial-responses.pdf (16/09/2011) 4 Ibid.

5 United Nations (2006) ‘Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,’ Article 13.

3

In order to ensure the principles of fairness, equity and justice are achieved, specific consideration must be given to needs of people with intellectual disability within the justice system, and appropriate strategies implemented to facilitate this outcome. Key Issues and Themes Representation of people with Intellectual Disability within the Justice System Numerous research studies have highlighted the overrepresentation of people with Intellectual Disability in the criminal justice system6. Information available from one study in Victoria indicates that the percentage of male prisoners released from prison within a specified period was marginally above the rate of intellectual disability across the broader Victorian population (1.3% to 1%)7. A number of hypotheses have been suggested to account for this. The NSW Law Reform Commission has classified these into three main categories8:

1. That people with intellectual disability are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour as a result of their disability (the susceptibility hypothesis);

2. That people with intellectual disability engage in crime at rates consistent with the rest of the community, but are more likely to be convicted as a result of their increased difficulties they experience navigating the criminal justice system (the different treatment hypothesis);

3. That the exposure and involvement of people with intellectual disability is a result of their increased exposure to particular environment factors (the psychological and socio-economic disadvantage hypothesis).

Life Without Barriers Supports the view of the NSW Law and Justice Foundation, that: The capacity of people with a cognitive impairment to effectively use the law or participate in legal processes is affected by a confluence of factors: factors relating to the individual and their circumstances, the interactions between individuals and legal systems, and the nature of the law and legal system itself9. The availability of up to date data on the characteristics of Victorian prisoners, including Intellectual disability, assists in creating an evidence base from which to design and develop appropriate and equitable programs and from which to monitor the impact of this work. As part of individual prison

6 French, Philip 2007, Disabled Justice: The barriers to justice for persons with disability in Queensland,

Disability Studies and Research Institute for Queensland Advocacy Incorporated. Accessed online: http://www.cjn.org.au/docs/disabled%20justice%20-%20the%20barriers%20to%20justice%20for%20persons%20with%20disability%20in%20queensland.pdf (16/9/2011) 7 Department of Justice – Corrections Victoria 2007, Intellectual Disability in the Victorian Prison System:

Characteristics of prisoners with an intellectual disability released from prison 2003-2006, Corrections Research Paper Series 02, Melbourne. Accessed online: http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/justlib/DOJ+Internet/resources/1/0/10b66a80404a9f2394cbfff5f2791d4a/Intellectual_Disability_in_the_Victorian_Prison_System.pdf (16/9/2011) 8 NSW Law Reform Commission 1996, op. cit.

9 Gray, Abigal, Forell, Suzie and Clarke, Sophie 2009, Cognitive Impairment, legal need and access to justice,

Law and Justice Foundation of NSW, Justice Issues, Paper 10. p. 5. Accessed online: http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/articleIDs/2EDD47C8AEB2BB36CA25756F0018AFE0/$file/JI10_Cognitive_impairment.pdf (16/9/2011)

4

profiles, The Statistical Profile of the Victorian Prison System Reports10 currently reports the number of people with an ‘identified’ Intellectual disability within each Victorian prison (that is, prisoners who are registered with the Department of Human Services as having a diagnosed intellectual disability). Building on this data and undertaking greater analysis of trends would enhance the development of this evidence base. Participants' knowledge of their rights People with Intellectual disability have varied knowledge of the role and operation of the legal system, and their rights within that system. In their consultations with people with Intellectual Disability, the Disability Council of NSW found that people with disability reported a general lack of knowledge of their rights, how to employ them and resources and other services that may be available to support them11. Understanding and being able to exercise rights is a fundamental tenet of ensuring a just and equitable legal system. Any failure to ensure the rights of people with intellectual disability are met could result in ongoing negative consequences at both an individual and group level.12 It is essential that people with intellectual disability are equipped with this information in a form and manner that is appropriate to them. In some cases, people with intellectual disability may not understand that their actions have legal consequences13. A community-based rights education program would provide an opportunity to not only educate people with intellectual disability on what their rights are once they’re engaged in the criminal justice system, but would also support a crime-prevention framework by enabling a broader understanding of what kinds of actions may have a legal consequence. People with intellectual disability will nonetheless continue to come into contact with the justice system, and it is at these points that the need for knowledge of their rights will be at its most acute. It is important not to assume all people with intellectual disability have a standard set of need and the same capacities. One-size-fits all approach will not provide enhanced knowledge of rights for people with intellectual disability. Carers play an important role in supporting people with intellectual disability to understand their rights, and also to monitor and advocate on behalf of people with intellectual disability where they feel these rights are not being met. Service Gaps

10

Available http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/justlib/DOJ+Internet/Home/Prisons/Research+and+Statistics/JUSTICE+-+Statistical+Profile+of+the+Victorian+Prison+System+%28PDF%29 (accessed 16/09/2011) 11

Gray, op. cit. 12

French, op. cit. 13

Bartels, Dr Lorana 2011, Police Interviews and vulnerable adult suspects, Australian Institute of Criminology, Research in Practice Report 21. Accessed online: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/6/7/9/%7B67994F7E-4598-4CA8-A1A6-A003B4102D0B%7Drip21_001.pdf (16/9/2011)

5

In 1996 the NSW Law Reform Commission released a report on People with an Intellectual Disability and the Criminal Justice System14. This report identified a number of gaps in service provision for people with intellectual disability, and found that filling these gaps would both prevent people entering into the criminal justice system and reduce rates of reoffending. The commission pointed to the need for a spectrum of services, including pre-offence prevention and diversion programs for people at risk of offending; greater access to supervised accommodation programs for people with an intellectual disability at risk of offending; counselling services and post-release programs to support reintegration into the community. The commission in particular highlighted the need for pre-offence and post release programs. Life Without Barriers supports these interventions as priority areas of focus. In their review of diversion of people with Intellectual disability from the NSW local court system, the Intellectual Disability Rights Service in NSW identified a lack of support services as a core contributor to rates of offending amongst people with an intellectual disability15. This includes a broad range of services including specialist disability services, health services such as drug and alcohol and other general programs such as housing and income support. Comprehensive availability of support services to people with intellectual disability is fundamental to the prevention and early intervention strategies. Through their research Queensland Advocacy Incorporated identified access to the following services as a priority16:

Access to behavioural and therapeutic and clinical programs that assist in the development of communication skills, impulse control, anger management, program solving and positive peer-group socialisation. This includes psychological services, allied health and rehabilitation.

Improving school retention rates and access to supported employment and other vocational programs or day programs

Appropriate accommodation options that provide capacity for intensive supervision and support

Ensuring that people with a disability, their family and carers receive support to avoid or minimise relationship stress and conflict, and maintain healthy relationships.

Access to support services has also been identified as a key factor in the granting of bail and parole for people with intellectual disability17. People with Intellectual disability can be denied bail because they cannot demonstrate an understanding of their bail conditions, an ability to comply or adequate support within the community to assist them to ensure ongoing alignment with their bail conditions. A lack of community support or diversionary programs suitable to people with intellectual disability can also affect the granting of parole. In some cases, people with intellectual disability are excluded or ineligible for programs that would support their release on bail or parole because of their

14

NSW Law Reform Commission, op. cit. 15

Intellectual Disability Rights Service 2008, Enabling Justice: A report on problems and solutions in relation to Diversion of Alleged Offenders with Intellectual Disability from the New South Wales Local Court System. Accessed online http://www.idrs.org.au/_pdf/enabling_justice.pdf (16/9/2011) 16

French, op. cit. 17

Gray, op. cit.

6

intellectual disability, such as drug and alcohol programs, and generic cognitive behaviour therapy programs18. Police Interviews, training and awareness In their report Police Interviews with Vulnerable Adult Suspects19, the Australian Institute of Criminology identified a number of ways that police could be prepared for potential interactions with people with intellectual disability, including having a basic understanding of types of disabilities they may encounter. Their review of research indicated that police were often unaware that individuals may have an intellectual impairment and that this may not be raised by individuals in discussions with police. The report cites research that found asking those who give an indication of vulnerability was a successful way of identifying and responding to people with mental and intellectual impairments. The report also pointed to the need for police to understand behavioural characteristics that may be associated with intellectual disability and to have appropriate training and protocols in place to respond to these characteristics. For example, people with a cognitive impairment can be highly suggestible and acquiescent and as such should be asked broad open-ended questions rather than questions that are closed and directive. People with an intellectual impairment may also have trouble concentrating and processing information, and may avoid eye-contact or be non-communicative, and can have difficulty comprehending consequences. In some circumstances, this behaviour could be misinterpreted as an indication of guilt. Where people with Intellectual disability experience communication and social barriers they are particularly vulnerable to providing incorrect, unreliable or self-incriminating information. The identification of vulnerability by police is a key factor in preventing this. The Australian Institute of Criminology reviewed key issues police are likely to encounter when interviewing vulnerable adult suspects, including people with intellectual disability, and outline the following good-practice steps20:

Establish rapport, outline the ground rules, and stress that it’s ok to say if you don’t understand or know the answer.

Encourage free-narrative through open-ended questions and prompts. Only ask specific or closed questions after open questions.

Provide the interviewee an opportunity to review and change the evidence they have provided.

Once they enter the criminal justice system, evidence indicates that people with intellectual disability are more susceptible to higher rates of recidivism; are less likely to be placed on probation as an alternative to a custodial sentence; are more likely to be held on remand and refused bail and

18

French, op. cit. 19

Bartels, op. cit. 20

ibid.

7

are less likely to be provided parole than other inmates.21 In some cases they are also more likely to receive a custodial sentence than people without intellectual disability, and for this sentence to be for a longer duration.22 Assumptions and stereotypes about people with intellectual disability can also affect the nature of interactions between police and people with intellectual disability. In their research, Gray, Forell and Clarke found that within a legal context, stereotypes of people with intellectual disabilities can paint them as incompetent, untrustworthy, and lacking in credibility23. These attitudes may impact on interactions with police, lawyers and judicial officers. Philip French in a study for Queensland Advocacy Incorporated identified a number of potential consequences of these attitudes, including:

Failure to categorise conduct towards people with intellectual disability as criminal

A tendency to privilege the accounts of others

Poor reporting practices24 All of these factors contribute to the experiences of people with an intellectual disability, and fundamentally shape the ability of the justice system to deliver justice and equitable outcomes to people with intellectual disability. Measures within Australia and internationally to improve access to, and interaction with, the justice system Measures that seek to break down barriers to the justice system and enhance participation People with an intellectual disability can face a range of difficulties in their interaction with the justice system. A Law and Justice Foundation of NSW survey identified a number of components of the court system as causing difficulty for people with intellectual disability, such as it being difficult to comprehend the process of the court through AVL links, and ‘intimidating and alienating’ courtroom practices and processes being an impediment to participation for people with intellectual disability.25 A key mechanism to support the full participation of people with intellectual disability is the availability of specialised legal support. Lawyers have a varied ability to be able to communicate effectively with people with disability, and most are not provided with any specific training to do so26. The ability to communicate effectively with people may become compounded by the amount of time a particular lawyer is able to devote to a case27. The Western Australian Disability Services Commission (WADSC) has argued that if people with intellectual disability are provided with information and support they are able to make appropriate

21

Gray, op. cit. 22

Department of Justice – Corrections Victoria, op. cit. 23

Gray, op. cit. 24

French, op. cit. 25

Gray, op. cit. 26

NSW Law Reform Commission 1996, op. cit. 27

ibid.

8

decisions and participate in court processes28. Strategies such as training service providers, legal practitioners and court staff on how impairments may affect behaviour and interaction with the court and on effective communication techniques are particularly important29. The availability of a skilled support person is another measure found to facilitate better engagement between people with intellectual disability and the justice system, particularly police interviews and court processes. In NSW, the Criminal Justice Support Network, a service of the Intellectual Disability Rights Service, provides advice and training for support people across NSW, and has trained volunteer support workers available in Sydney, Newcastle and the Illawarra30. Skilled support workers play an important role in advocating for their clients, facilitating their understanding and engagement with the justice system, and assisting lawyers to advocate for appropriate responses to their clients31. Within Victoria, the Villamanta Disability Legal Rights Centre play an integral role in supporting and advocating for the needs of people with disability through community education, legal case work, policy and law reform Support persons can be vital in assisting lawyers to effectively communicate with people with intellectual disability and effectively advocate for services. Measures to deliver just and equitable outcomes The effective identification of people with intellectual disability is a precursor to the delivery of just and equitable outcomes. The NSW Law reform commission has suggested that as part of a committal hearing, magistrates should have an ability to order an assessment of an accused person, allowing issues related to the fitness of accused people to be raised and resolved early32. The availability of community-based or semi-custodial sentences may be preferable options in the case of some people with intellectual disability, where they would be vulnerable within custodial environments and where the maintenance of community connection would facilitate rehabilitation33. People with intellectual disability can be excluded from participation in diversion programs, with some reports suggesting there can be an unwillingness to accept people with intellectual disability into these programs34. There is also some evidence that there may be a lack of knowledge about legal mechanisms available in respect of people with intellectual disability. In NSW, s 32 of the Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 (NSW) provides an opportunity to divert people with ‘developmental disability’ from the criminal justice system and into services that will more effectively address their support needs. A review of the use of s 32 by the Intellectual Disability Rights Service in NSW suggests

28

Gray, op. cit. 29

Gray, op. cit. 30

See www.idrs.org.au 31

NSW Law Reform Commission 1996, op. cit. 32

NSW Law Reform Commission 2010b, People with cognitive and mental health impairments and the criminal justice system: criminal responsibility and consequences, Consultation paper 6. Accessed online: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/vwFiles/CP06.pdf/$file/CP06.pdf 33

Intellectual Disability Rights Service, op. cit. 34

Gray, op. cit.

9

limitations in the knowledge of some legal staff in relation to the operation of this section of the Act35. The NSW Law Reform Commission has identified key reasons that outline the importance of diversionary programs for people with cognitive impairment, including intellectual disability36:

In the interests of fairness where an individual offender’s culpability is reduced as a result of their impairment

Where diversion can break the cycle of recidivism, and ensure that the criminal justice system does not become a substitute for appropriate and comprehensive social services.

Where diversion is the best method available to effectively break the cycle and risk of offending, and respond to the underlying causes of crime.

The Law Reform Commission found that:

In light of the reasons just outlined, diversionary schemes for offenders with a cognitive impairment or mental illness should aim to identify the underlying causes of the criminal conduct, provide a means of overcoming these underlying causes, stop people from becoming entrenched in the criminal justice system, and ultimately redress their over-representation in that system.37

Life Without Barriers supports the development of targeted measures to reduce rates of recidivism, particularly amongst people with intellectual disability. Life Without Barriers also support the implementation of diversionary and other programs that resolve the cause of offending behaviour. Both the individual and community benefit from this approach. Provide responses that address the circumstances of the offender and offence concerned. Literature indicates a strong connection between cognitive disability and other indicators of disadvantage, such as low income, unemployment and lower levels of education38. The combined influence of these factors can result in an increased risk of legal issues and increased barriers to resolution of these matters .39 The Enabling Justice report found:

The effects of intellectual disability are not just the result of factors internal to the individual but rather are the product of the interaction amongst and between the individual’s cognitive impairment and various aspects of psychological and socioeconomic disadvantage. Offending conduct is best understood as a product of or related to this interaction.40

35

Intellectual Disability Rights Service 2008, op. cit. 36

NSW Law Reform Commission 2010a, People with cognitive and mental health impairments in the criminal justice system: diversion, Consultation paper 7. Accessed online: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/vwFiles/CP07.pdf/$file/CP07.pdf (16/9/2011) 37

ibid. p. 6. 38

Gray, op. cit. 39

ibid. 40

Intellectual Disability Rights Service, op. cit. p. 6.

10

In Disabled Justice, French found that people with disability were more likely to be convicted of offences such as repeated minor infringements of a similar character; addiction-related crime; anti-social behaviour in public space and compliance related offences41. The report found that:

The most important foundation for the prevention of crime by persons with disability is the development of a good quality, comprehensive, individualised social support system that will ensure persons with disability have access to the services they require to manage their daily lives and attain a reasonable quality of life42.

In recognition of the social and environment factors Life Without Barriers supports the implementation of effective social services, including non-government services, as a key factor in preventing crime and, where risk factors are identified, providing targeted interventions to resolve offending behaviour and risk factors. Life Without Barriers supports the view that to ensure equitable outcomes for people with intellectual disability engaged with the justice system, it is necessary to look beyond court environments into the social causes and community-based responses to address offending conduct43. Young people with intellectual disability and the justice system Young people with intellectual disability face compounded challenges when interacting with the justice system. The Australian Human Rights Commission found that the experiences and needs of Indigenous young people with cognitive disability or mental health issues in contact with the juvenile justice system are largely neglected in literature, policy and in some cases practice, and are often relegated to the ‘too hard basket’ under the code of ‘complex cases’44. For these young people early intervention and prevention services are fundamental to promoting positive life outcomes, and intervening to prevent them from progressing into the juvenile justice system, and then the criminal justice system as adults.

Youth Justice Services are an emerging area of work for Life Without Barriers. Life Without Barriers works with young people and their families to break the cycle of offending and become valued members of their community. Key early intervention models have been implemented with the aim of diverting young people from the criminal justice system. This includes the NSW Bail Assistance Program and the provision of the Multi-systemic Therapy (MST) model. The Bail Assistance program has been implemented by Life Without Barriers to support our services in Dubbo, NSW. The program provides an after-hours phone line which assists police to help young people who are eligible for bail to receive adequate support in the community. The program connects NSW Police with Juvenile Justice staff, who contact Life Without Barriers for assistance.

41

French, op. cit. 42

Ibid. p.54 43

Intellectual Disability Rights Service, op. cit. 44

Australian Human Rights Commission 2008, Preventing Crime and Promoting Rights for Indigenous Young

People with Cognitive Disabilities and Mental Health Issues, Sydney. Accessed online

http://www.youth.nsw.gov.au/__data/page/1215/preventingcrime.pdf (16/9/2011)

11

After running a pilot program in Dubbo, LWB recently received funding to run the Bail Assistance program in Newcastle and Dubbo for a 12 month period. Prior to this program, a young person who was eligible for bail may have been held in custody because they did not have anywhere safe to live or because police were unable to locate a suitable adult to attend the police station. LWB has been able to offer suitable alternatives for these young people, minimising their experiences of custodial settings. Significantly, Life Without Barriers also commenced as a Multisystemic Therapy (MST) network partner in October 2009. MST is an intensive family and community based treatment targeting young people who have serious behavioural problems with violence, alcohol and drug-abuse or offending and who are at imminent risk of out-of-home placement. It is one of the most extensively validated and widely transported evidence-based psychological treatments45. With over 30 years of research and 18 studies, MST has been repeatedly shown to reduce re-arrest rates up to 70%, reduce out-of-home care placements up to 64% and facilitate fewer mental-health problems for serious juvenile offenders.46 The primary goal of MST is to empower parents with the skills and resources needed to independently address the difficulties that arise in raising teenagers. It also aims to empower young people to manage their relationships with families, peers, school and neighbourhoods. The provision of early intervention programs and adequate support for vulnerable individuals is a significant endeavour necessary to help divert access to and interaction with the criminal justice system. Conclusion

Special consideration of the unique circumstances and issues of people with Intellectual Disability who come into contact with the justice system supports the functioning of a fair and equitable system that delivers just outcomes to the community. Enhancing the way people with an intellectual disability engage with the justice system will also create a more efficient and effective system. Reducing recidivism, intervening to prevent offending behaviour and diversion from incarceration will prevent unnecessary financial costs to government, human costs of individuals and families and social costs to communities. The cost to government of properly meeting the needs of people with intellectual disability would be comprehensively recouped47.

45

Henggeler, S.W. and Schoenwald, S.K. 2011, ‘Social Policy Report: Evidence-Based Interventions for Juvenile Offenders and Juvenile Justice - Policies that Support Them,’ Sharing child and youth development knowledge, Volume 25, number 1 46

MST Services 2010, ‘MST: Proven Results,’ accessed online at: http://mstservices.com/index.php/proven-results 47

NSW Law Reform Commission, op. cit.

12

Bibliography

Australian Human Rights Commission 2008, Preventing Crime and Promoting Rights for Indigenous Young People with Cognitive Disabilities and Mental Health Issues, Sydney. Accessed online http://www.youth.nsw.gov.au/__data/page/1215/preventingcrime.pdf (16/9/2011) Bartels, Dr Lorana 2011, Police Interviews and vulnerable adult suspects, Australian Institute of Criminology, Research in Practice Report 21. Accessed online: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/6/7/9/%7B67994F7E-4598-4CA8-A1A6-A003B4102D0B%7Drip21_001.pdf (16/9/2011) Department of Justice – Corrections Victoria 2007, Intellectual Disability in the Victorian Prison System: Characteristics of prisoners with an intellectual disability released from prison 2003-2006, Corrections Research Paper Series 02, Melbourne. Accessed online: http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/justlib/DOJ+Internet/resources/1/0/10b66a80404a9f2394cbfff5f2791d4a/Intellectual_Disability_in_the_Victorian_Prison_System.pdf (16/9/2011) French, Philip 2007, Disabled Justice: The barriers to justice for persons with disability in Queensland, Disability Studies and Research Institute for Queensland Advocacy Incorporated. Accessed online: http://www.cjn.org.au/docs/disabled%20justice%20-%20the%20barriers%20to%20justice%20for%20persons%20with%20disability%20in%20queensland.pdf (16/9/2011) Gray, Abigal, Forell, Suzie and Clarke, Sophie 2009, Cognitive Impairment, legal need and access to justice, Law and Justice Foundation of NSW, Justice Issues, Paper 10. Accessed online: http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/articleIDs/2EDD47C8AEB2BB36CA25756F0018AFE0/$file/JI10_Cognitive_impairment.pdf (16/9/2011) Grunseit, Anne, Forell, Suzie and McCarron, Emily 2008, Taking justice into custody: the legal needs of prisoners, Law and Justice Foundation of NSW, Access to justice and legal needs Volume 5. Accessed online: http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/articleIDs/4DC35D5A0C06F1C4CA25748D00131D8C/$file/TakingJusticeIntoCustody.pdf (18/8/2011) Hayes, Susan 2006, ‘People with intellectual disabilities as victims of crime – the police and judicial response,’ Paper presented at the 39th Annual conference of the Australasian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability, November 2004, Adelaide SA. Accessed online: http://www.qcjc.com.au/research/download/5/research/police-powers-responsibilities-1/victims-police-and-judicial-responses.pdf (16/09/2011) Henggeler, S.W. and Schoenwald, S.K. 2011, ‘Social Policy Report: Evidence-Based Interventions for Juvenile Offenders and Juvenile Justice - Policies that Support Them,’ Sharing child and youth development knowledge, Volume 25, number 1 Intellectual Disability Rights Service 2008, Enabling Justice: A report on problems and solutions in relation to Diversion of Alleged Offenders with Intellectual Disability from the New South Wales Local Court System. Accessed online http://www.idrs.org.au/_pdf/enabling_justice.pdf (16/9/2011)

13

NSW Law Reform Commission 1996, People with an Intellectual Disability and the Criminal Justice System: Crime and people with an Intellectual Disability, Report 80. Accessed online: http://www.ipc.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/R80TOC (16/9/2011) NSW Law Reform Commission 2010a, People with cognitive and mental health impairments in the criminal justice system: diversion, Consultation paper 7. Accessed online: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/vwFiles/CP07.pdf/$file/CP07.pdf (16/9/2011) NSW Law Reform Commission 2010b, People with cognitive and mental health impairments and the criminal justice system: criminal responsibility and consequences, Consultation paper 6. Accessed online: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/vwFiles/CP06.pdf/$file/CP06.pdf (16/9/2011) Wilson, C., Nettelbeck, T., Potter, R. And Perry, C. 1996, Intellectual Disability and Criminal Victimisation, Australian Institute of Criminology: Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 60. Accessed online: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/F/6/A/%7BF6ADE95F-EAC7-458F-8AB9-42E455CA52E1%7Dti60.pdf (16/09/2011)