INTRODUCTION

4.1 The difficulties for police involved in identifying whether a person has an intellectual disability leads to the issue of police education and training. Unless police are trained to recognise the possibility that the person has an intellectual disability, police guidelines for appropriate questioning of such a person will be ineffective. In its submission to the Commission, the Kingsford Legal Centre commented that they:

support the need for police to be better educated as to the nature, needs and abilities of people with an intellectual disability. In our experience police inability and lack of understanding in dealing with intellectually disabled people has had highly detrimental consequences.¹

4.2 The same submission provided an example where a client with an intellectual disability, defending assault proceedings,

became very anxious and frustrated about the court process, presumably aggravated by his lack of understanding of formal requirements. In expressing his frustration he became quite loud inside the Court and the Court precincts. The reaction of police was to threaten further charges rather than to assist in calming the situation.

4.3 Other submissions made comments such as: “the importance of training for police cannot be emphasised too highly. At present it is totally inadequate”;² and have provided examples of inappropriate treatment of people with an intellectual disability by the police: for example, refusing to take statements from victims on the assumption that the person will make an unreliable witness.

EXISTING TRAINING PROGRAMS

New South Wales

4.4 In New South Wales there is very little formal training for police officers in relation to intellectual disability. It is not included, for example, in the detective or investigators training programs. Police recruits in New South Wales undertake the Police Recruit Education Programme (“PREP”), which consists of both full-time training at the NSW Police Academy at Goulburn and field training. The present course consists of five phases over a period of 18 months, of which 24 weeks are spent at Goulburn. As discussed in the Issues Paper, there is not a specialised segment on intellectual disability; rather social and disadvantage issues are considered within the community policing unit. The course trains new recruits to identify people who are behaving “unusually” in the circumstances in which they are found. Networking with local community organisations is encouraged. The Academy also is participating in research, referred to in para 2.7 above, in relation to this area. Junior police officers, however, still receive much of their training “on the job” from senior officers.

4.5 Staff Development Days also occur at each Police Station, but the amount of time which can be given to issues such as intellectual disability will be limited and affected by police priorities. The Commission is not aware of any Staff Development Days which have been run in relation to intellectual disability. On-going training is controlled by District Training Officers, who are responsible for identifying problems and developing appropriate programs.

4.6 The Initial Response Officers Course (“IROC”) is designed to train police officers dealing with sexual assault and child abuse. The IROC training takes place in Sydney, or at the Academy in Goulburn for country officers. The police officers apply to undertake the course and are selected by the district or region. They undertake pre-residential reading and questionnaires before a two week residential intensive training program. They then return to their region for field work over approximately 18 months. While in the field they are supervised by officers who already have completed the IROC course in their region or by other experienced officers. The officers are assessed by a panel as to their field work and general attitude and, if successful, are accredited. They are then allowed to take statements in sexual assault cases and can supervise other IROC trainees. There is a two hour guest lecture in the course about victims of sexual assault with intellectual disabilities. Such a course has its limitations; for example, it only focuses on victims and it does not deal with the generally perceived reluctance of victims with an intellectual disability to report crime. The proposed Safe Custody Programme, designed to train custody officers, will also include a component on the special needs of people with an intellectual disability, as a separate issue to the psychiatric and medical issues dealt with under this new course.

Victoria

4.7 As discussed in the Issues Paper, in Victoria there has been more extensive training of police in relation to intellectual disability issues, following the Victorian Office of Public Advocate’s 1988 Report Finding the Way.³ The Report led to a requirement in the Victorian Police Instructions that an Independent Third Person (“ITP”) be present at police interviews of persons who have an intellectual disability. This requirement was extended in January 1991 to include people with mental illness, acquired brain damage and senile dementia. The role of the ITP is discussed in Chapter 6, below.

4.8 In 1989, the Office of Intellectual Disability Services instituted training programs for police throughout Victoria, “to help police understand intellectual disability and its effect on charging, interviewing and accessing appropriate crisis resources.”⁴ The Constables’ Training Course at the Police Academy and at Airlie College Training Course were also revised to place more emphasis on these issues.⁵ Much of this training has been in relation to the establishment of the ITP Program, which provides police with 24-hour access to ITPs.

4.9 Victoria Police has produced, with the assistance of Community Services Victoria and the Victorian Office of the Public Advocate, a training kit entitled “Intellectually Disabled Offenders and Victims” (1990). It includes:

• a forty-five minute training package based on the Force Instructions, including information on the role of the ITP and the categories of disability for which an ITP must be used;
• a thirty-two minute video highlighting four scenarios where police interviewed a person with an intellectual disability and illustrating the use of the ITP;
• a blue information card designed to be carried by police;
• a brochure clarifying the role of the ITP;
• a set of overhead slides produced in the standard Police format, highlighting key issues; and
• a handout for police members providing contact names and addresses.⁶

4.10 Each of these components provide information about intellectual disability (distinguishing it clearly from psychiatric illness), indicators of intellectual disability, the relevant Force Instructions and the role of the ITP, together with guidelines for interviewing a person with an intellectual disability and appropriate referrals. The manual also provides some sample questions for police to use to assist them in identifying whether the person has an intellectual disability. From June 1990 to June 1992 the training package was delivered to 2,474 police, representing 40 per cent of operational Victorian Police.⁷ Training has occurred at all levels: at the Police Academy, at Detective Training School, in the Community Policing Squad and as part of district training, with a priority on training the District Training Officers.⁸ Training has also been provided for the volunteer ITPs involved, but this is discussed further in relation to the role of a third person in police questioning in Chapter 6, below.

WHAT TRAINING IS APPROPRIATE?

4.11 A sexual assault worker who has trained police about intellectual disability issues has commented on the need to explode the myths about intellectual disability and sexuality, such as “who’d want to have sex with them anyway?” She said many members of the community believe these myths and that community attitudes are reflected by the police. “Debunking” some of the myths about intellectual disability must be an important part of any training program.⁹

4.12 It has been stated that training programs should make it clear to police the consequences of failing to recognise the disability, both for themselves and for the person concerned (whether suspect, witness or victim).¹⁰ Police should be taught about the implications of inappropriate questioning and the possibilities of unfairness and exclusion of evidence. The advantages of appropriate procedures for the effective investigation and collection of evidence should be stressed.

4.13 According to some submissions, training in relation to disability issues should not merely be directed towards the new recruit. One police officer commented that:

education must start with the police already working in the field then flow onto the Trainee leaving the Goulburn Academy. The reason for training the people in the field first is because they will in turn be trainers of the younger police. The younger police are very susceptible to attitudes and knowledge on the part of the experienced street police person. Changing the existing attitudes will have a more concrete effect than starting over and hoping ten years down the line the attitude would have taken hold through younger police.¹¹

4.14 Many of the submissions to the Commission, while stressing the importance of police training, commented upon the need to measure the effectiveness of police training and suggested that training without subsequent reinforcement and the backup of sanctions for inappropriate behaviour can not be sufficient. It also has been suggested that it may be unrealistic to expect to train all police, and that it may be more effective to:

train some officers from relevant sections of the police force, and to establish procedures which ensure that trained officers are called in to deal with intellectually disabled people. Such a system could operate in a similar way to that of specially trained officers being available to assist victims of sexual crimes.¹²

Such a system, however, still requires the untrained officer to identify when the person being questioned has an intellectual disability, in order to set the appropriate procedures in train.

4.15 The Commission believes that training about the special needs and vulnerability of people with an intellectual disability should not just be directed to the level of the new recruit, but should be included in the training provided for custody officers and detectives, at other specialist training courses dealing with areas in which police are likely to come into contact with people with an intellectual disability, and in Staff Development Days. It believes that the following issues are relevant for police training:

• identifying whether a person may have an intellectual disability;
• the distinction between intellectual disability and mental illness;
• the relevant Codes of Practice or Police Instructions;
• the particular vulnerability of people with an intellectual disability in police questioning;
• available services for people with an intellectual disability, especially local services; and
• the consequences of failing to deal appropriately with offenders with an intellectual disability, both for the person with an intellectual disability and for the police officer involved, such as the possible exclusion of evidence.

The Commission seeks submissions about what other issues must be canvassed and about the time required for such training.

The role of people with disabilities in police training

4.16 Many submissions have referred to the importance of people with disabilities being involved in training the police. The University of Sydney’s Community Disability and Ageing Program, for example, places an emphasis on personal contact with people with disabilities in its Disability Awareness Workshops. This issue was also reflected strongly in the Commission’s consultations with people with an intellectual disability, which concluded that:

[m]ost participants felt that the police did not know much about intellectual disability and that they should have to undertake some sort of special training to learn about it, including how to react or respond to a person with an intellectual disability. Personal contact with people with disabilities was seen as important. It was suggested that the police needed to meet people with a disability, or participate in discussions with them (such as the consultation groups conducted by the Commission), to gain an understanding about people with an intellectual disability and how to communicate effectively with them. Some participants indicated a willingness to speak to the police and referred to the benefits that such contact would afford. It was also suggested that this understanding could be achieved by people with a disability working with the police on a voluntary basis to increase understanding on both sides. Specialist units, consisting of officers who had been specially trained about intellectual disability was raised as an option by one participant. Another suggested that there should be a police officer who has experience with people with disabilities at police stations.¹³

4.17 One organisation which already has undertaken such a role is Self Advocacy,¹⁴ originally formed in Parramatta as the Western Region Rights Committee. It is a group of people, all with an intellectual disability, who wish to speak for themselves about their needs rather than through a service provider. The aim is to increase the assertiveness and self-esteem of people with an intellectual disability. The organisation does have some support workers without an intellectual disability, such as a person with accountancy training. Self Advocacy members talk to community groups to increase awareness of intellectual disability and to teach people to communicate effectively with a person who has an intellectual disability. The organisation also gives talks on communication skills to students entering the disability area and to the Community Disability and Ageing Program’s Disability Awareness Workshops. They have also worked with organisations such as Qantas about how to treat passengers with a disability. Other such organisations have now been set up outside Sydney. Individual members of Self Advocacy have expressed their interest to the Commission in talking to police and lawyers about intellectual disability.

CONCLUSIONS

4.18 The Commission seeks further information and comments from the Police Service about the issues raised in this chapter. The Commission recognises that the development of detailed training programs is a complex matter, which must take into account many internal factors. Therefore, this Discussion Paper does not set out detailed proposals for reform in relation to training, but suggests instead that the existing training about intellectual disability should be assessed and proposals for amendment be later developed in consultation with the Police Service. The Commission does, however, provide general comments about what it sees as the crucial areas involved in police training. It recognises that training is an area which should have regular monitoring and input to ensure that the information given is correct and the suggested procedures and terminology used are appropriate, particularly in an area such as intellectual disability.

TENTATIVE PROPOSALS FOR REFORM: TRAINING

12. The detail of training programs is primarily an internal matter, based upon an organisation’s particular systems and procedures. Therefore the Commission proposes that an audit of current police training in relation to intellectual disability be undertaken. Training about the special needs and vulnerability of people with an intellectual disability should not just be directed to the level of the new recruit, but should be included in the training provided for custody officers and detectives, at other specialist training courses dealing with areas in which police are likely to come into contact with people with an intellectual disability, and in “Staff Development Days”. Some of the relevant issues in this area are:

• identifying whether a person may have an intellectual disability;
• the distinction between intellectual disability and mental illness;
• the relevant Codes of Practice or Police Instructions;
• the particular vulnerability of people with an intellectual disability in police questioning; available services for people with an intellectual disability, especially local services; and
• the consequences of failing to deal appropriately with offenders with an intellectual disability, both for the person with an intellectual disability and for the police officer involved, such as the possible exclusion of evidence.



13. People with disabilities should be involved in this training so that police officers have personal contact with people with an intellectual disability and the benefit of their insights and experiences. This may assist to decrease some of the misunderstandings about people with an intellectual disability.

14. Training about intellectual disability should have regular monitoring and input to ensure that the information given is correct and the suggested procedures and terminology used are appropriate.

1. Kingsford Legal Centre Submission (29 October 1992) at 2.

2. See, for example New South Wales Sexual Assault Committee Submission (August 1992) at 3.

3. Victoria. Office of the Public Advocate Finding the Way: the Criminal Justice System and the Person with Intellectual Disability (Office of the Public Advocate, Victoria, 1987).

4. Victoria Police Corporate Planning and Review Department Submission (31 August 1992) at 2; L M Osman Finding New Ways: A Review of Services to the Person with Intellectual Disability in the Victorian Criminal Justice System (Office of the Public Advocate, Victoria, 1988) at 11.

5. Osman at 11; Victoria Police Corporate Planning and Review Department Submission (31 August 1992) at 1-2.

6. Community Services Victoria (Staff Development Branch) Statewide Victoria Police and Independent Third Person Training Project Report (5 April 1993) at 4.

7. Community Services Victoria at 4.

8. Community Services Victoria at 4-6.

9. Ms Susan Kendall Oral Submission (23 July 1993). Ms Kendall has given lectures for the IROC course.

10. S C Hayes and G Craddock Simply Criminal (2nd ed, Federation Press, Sydney, 1992) at 54.

11. Senior Constable Pedro Fernandez Submission (8 December 1991) at 15.

12. Office of Legal Aid and Family Services Submission (28 August 1992) at 2.

13. New South Wales. Law Reform Commission People with an Intellectual Disability and the Criminal Justice System: Consultations (Research Report 3, 1993) at para 4.10.

14. This body should not be confused with Citizen Advocacy, which is involved in recruiting people to act as advocates for people with an intellectual disability, on a long term and one-to-one basis. Citizen Advocacy also has some crisis advocates but this is not the main focus of its work.