NCJ Number
149380
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 63 Issue: 7 Dated: (July 1994) Pages: 12-16
Date Published
1994
Length
5 pages
Annotation
Mentally retarded offenders represent between 5 and 10 percent of the prison population in the United States, but no consistent way of dealing with these offenders has emerged to date.
Abstract
When handling mentally retarded offenders, law enforcement officers usually base their reactions on two misconceptions. They view them as either crazy people who cannot refrain from committing criminal acts or as child- like individuals who deserve pity, are not competent to stand trial for their actions, and must be diverted from the criminal justice process when possible. Mental retardation, however, cannot be viewed as an excuse or defense for criminal behavior, and criminal justice professionals must fully understand mental retardation versus mental illness, competency, and insanity. Mentally retarded persons are not always easy to identify, especially those who function well socially. Consequently, police officers can attempt to recognize mental retardation based on individual responses to certain behavioral questions. When conducting interviews, police officers must ensure that offenders understand their Miranda rights. Mental retardation does not automatically make offenders incompetent to stand trial, and courts must be willing to obtain the services of qualified forensic psychologists to evaluate competency. The insanity defense may apply to mentally retarded offenders, but jurisdictions have different standards regarding this defense. In general, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and courts need to take mental retardation into account but not use it as an excuse to divert mentally retarded offenders from the criminal justice process. 5 endnotes