Page 21 - SafeLinkEvaluation

The LD ISVA also worked with LD team
to make sure timely capacity assessments were conducted when there was no clear reason for any delay, as the below case illustrates.
Case example: different ideas around capacity to speak to police
The LD ISVA spoke to one client, ‘Angela’ about talking to the police and felt that the client had understood the information.
Angela told the LD ISVA on three occasions that she wanted to talk to the police. Despite also telling the social worker two months previous, Angela
had not been given the chance to talk to the police. The LD ISVA tried to find out why. She spoke to social workers and the police and determined that although a capacity assessment had been booked in, it had not been done.
The LD ISVA suggested that they assess capacity in the next week or that she and Angela would go ahead and speak to the police based on professional judgement. The social workers agreed that talking to the police would be a good idea.
iv) Police/CJS challenge 4: Clients with LD find that not only is cross-examination retraumatising, it is not adapted to their communication needs. Moreover, juries perceive people with LD as lacking competence and reliability.
In court, even with the best support victims with LD often find the experience very intimidating which can impact on the way they present and because of communication issues they are often seen as poor witnesses which can influence whether they are believed by the jury.
People with LD and their carers can find court especially difficult. Beckene et al.’s (2017) research shows that because of these issues, people with LD feel they need support before and during the court case. The LD ISVA provided this support, as the following case illustrates.
19 | Safe Link