Justice Disability Steering Group
Access to Justice 1 in 4poll
Final Report
1. Research Background / 5
1.1 Background and Objectives / 5
1.2 Methodology and Sample / 5
2. Experience of the Scottish Justice System / 7
2.1 Involvement in the Justice System / 7
2.2 Disabling Barriers Encountered in the Justice System / 8
2.3 Views on Letters/Leaflets / 9
3. General Impressions of the Justice System / 11
3.1 Overall Impressions of the System / 11
3.2 Views on Equal Access to Justice System / 12
4. Getting Advice and Knowing Your Rights / 14
4.1 Accessing the Justice System / 14
4.2 Awareness of Sources of Assistance/Information / 15
5. Staff Attitudes / 17
5.1 Perceptions of Helpfulness of Staff / 17
5.2 Perceptions of Staff’s Understanding of Needs of Disabled People / 17
6. Final Comments / 19
1.1 Background and Objectives
This report describes the results of Capability Scotland’s 1 in 4 Poll exploring disabled people’s experience of the Scottish Justice System.
The specific objectives of the survey were:
- to assess the likelihood of disabled people having experience of the justice system
- to look at perceptions of the justice system
- to explore awareness of information and advice on the justice system
1.2 Methodology and Sample
A self-completion questionnaire was sent to 461 1 in 4 poll members either by mail or email on 1st July 2009. A total of 109 responses were received by the closing date of 24th July, representing a response rate of 23%. The questionnaire was also posted on the Capability Scotland website to give an additional 116 responses that have been included in this report. The tables in this report are based on 225 responses unless otherwise stated.
The table below shows the profile of respondents to the questionnaire, indicating that a good sample of both men and women responded, predominantly over 45 years old and straight. 94% were from a white ethnic background.
Table 1.1: Profile of respondents
Number of respondents / %Male / 106 / 47
Female / 106 / 47
No reply / 13 / 6
17 or under / 8 / 4
Under 24 years old / 7 / 3
25-34 years old / 16 / 7
35-44 years old / 41 / 18
45-54 years old / 73 / 32
55-64 years old / 54 / 24
Over 65 years old / 26 / 12
Straight / 195 / 87
Gay / 14 / 6
Bisexual / 6 / 3
Transgender / 2 / 1
No reply / 8 / 4
White Scottish / 176 / 78
White other British / 37 / 16
White other background / 5 / 2
Mixed / 4 / 2
No reply / 3 / 1
Table 1.2 shows that two thirds of respondents were disabled and almost one in three had a long term medical condition. In total, 28% of respondents cared for or lived with a disabled person (several respondents did both).
Note: results in the table add up to more than 100% due to multiple responses.
Table 1.2: Type of respondent
Base = all respondents (225)
Number of respondents / %I am a disabled person / 144 / 64
I have a long term medical condition/illness / 66 / 29
I care for a disabled person / 45 / 20
I live with a disabled person / 17 / 8
2.1 Involvement in the Justice System
42% of respondents had been involved in the justice system. People aged 25-54 years old and those with a long term medical condition were most likely to have been involved in the justice system.
The key areas of involvement (mentioned by 5% or more of respondents) are shown in Chart 2.1. Key findings from the analysis of the findings were:
- the most likely involvement with the justice system was being a victim of a crime, followed by witnessing a crime or acting as a juror
- 31% of disabled people said they had been a victim of a crime, above the survey average
- disabled people were also more likely than average to be involved in a tribunal: just over one in ten disabled respondents said they had been involved with employment, mental health or additional support needs tribunals.
Chart 2.1: Details of last involvement in justice system
Base = respondents who have been involved in system (122)
One third of respondents (35%) who had experience of the justice system had consulted a solicitor for advice or assistance and a fifth (19%) had applied for legal aid to take their case forward.
Sixteen respondents gave examples of other types of involvement with the justice system, the full list is shown in Appendix One.
2.2 Disabling Barriers Encountered in Justice System
Whilst 42% of respondents who had experience of the justice system had not encountered any disabled barriers in their last experience, 48% had encountered disabling barriers. The two main barriers were attitudinal or institutional, with over one in five respondents saying they had encountered one of these barriers. Key findings on barriers were:
- young disabled men were most likely to feel they had faced attitudinal barriers, such as not being taken seriously
- institutional barriers, such as the way the organisation worked, had been experienced across all age groups and by carers and disabled people
- 15% of respondents had experienced environmental barriers, such as access to buildings
Chart 2.2: Experience of disabling barriers in the justice system (prompted)
Base = respondents who have been involved in system (122)
Twelve respondents made unprompted comments on the difficulties they had faced (see Appendix Two for full list). These comments highlighted that disabled people often face a range of barriers in the justice system, for example attitudinal, physical and institutional barriers
“I was a juror in a court room on an upper floor and the usher went marching away with the other jurors and I was left to find and use the lift on my own.”
“Loops are not routinely used - you have to ask for a microphone. Only one is provided, so it's a choice of hearing the bench or the other party's brief. When called as a witness in a criminal case, again I had to ask about microphones, and the system for calling witnesses was a tannoy in the waiting room.”
“I could access the rooms but found it difficult to do so. I found attending nine to five to be exhausting, and was offered no extra help. Because of my illness I have to work from home, so I freelance, and I could not get any compensation for my lost earnings. Because I was earning the fact that I was caring for my partner was not recognised and I could not get help to provide for him in my absence.”
2.3 Views on Letters/Leaflets
Although 94% of respondents were satisfied with the letters/leaflets they were provided with in their last experience of justice system, 16% said that the communication was not suitable, mainly because the print was too small (7%) or because they were unable to get the information in the language they spoke (5%).
Chart 2.3: Views on letters/leaflets provided
Base = respondents who have been involved in system (122)
Comments on letters/leaflets highlighted the positive views of the majority of respondents:
“Clearly written in language that I could understand.”
“The leaflets helped me to explain what would happen in court but I felt it could have been better."
The problems faced by a significant minority of respondents were also described:
“My power of attorney had to read it as I didn't understand a word, and I've an honours degree”
One respondent described issues with communication by phone:
“mments on letters/leaflets highlighted the positive views of the majority of respondents:
print was too small (8%) or because I had two phone calls to the District Court to clarify progress of the case and found their attitude extremely aggressive and dismissive. Information was not
volunteered or given in writing at any stage. I requested a meeting with the
PFs Assistant and he explained the situation.”
3.1 Overall Impressions of the System
One third of all respondents were negative in their impression of the justice system. These negative perceptions were held both by those who had experience of the system and disabled people who had no experience of the system. The most negative views of the justice system were held by:
- men
- 35-64 year olds
- people who care for or live with a disabled person
Chart 3.1: Overall impression of the justice system
Base = all respondents (225)
Unprompted comments on the justice system showed a fairly negative view of the system:
- 14 respondents made negative comments about the justice system in general
- 6 respondents made positive comments about the justice system in general
- 6 respondents made negative comments about the way specific cases were handled
The full list of comments is shown in Appendix Three.
3.2 Views on Equal Access to the Justice System
The negative views of the justice system were confirmed by the findings to the question on whether or not disabled people have equal access to justice compared to non-disabled people: 48% of respondents said they did not think that disabled people have equal access to the justice system.
Chart 3.2: Views on Equal Access to the Justice System
Base = all respondents (225)
Unprompted views on disabled people’s access to the justice system suggested that staff attitudes were the key issue for people trying to access the system. A total of 43 respondents made comments,:
- 17 were neutral – respondents saying they did not know enough about the system to comment
- 11 were about negative staff attitudes
- 1 was about positive staff attitudes
- 5 related to communication issues
- 2 were about physical access
- 7 were comments on other aspects of the justice system
The comments on negative staff attitudes highlighted the real problems that disabled people face:
“I was interviewed by the police in connection with an incident. They were trying to get me to confess to a crime .I was told by them I was a vulnerable adult ,and needed support from someone who is ok to sit with me. I was told they get them from the social services and no one came to support me and still the police carried on to interview me. I couldn’t even phone or get in contact with my support worker. It was a bad experience for me, being interviewed by 2 policemen and me having no backup of my own.”
“Because they think that disabled people can bring things upon themselves just because they are disabled.”
“Communication problems make authorities think you lack intelligence.”
4.1 Accessing the Justice System
Just over a quarter of respondents (28%) had experienced problems which had prevented them from accessing the justice system. The most common problems were the cost and stress involved. Cost was a particular problem for younger disabled people (under 35 years old).
Chart 4.1 Problems with accessing justice system
Base = all respondents (225)
The comments made by respondents on the barriers they faced suggested that the principal barriers related to accessing and experience of using legal professionals. Examples of the comments made are shown below (see Appendix Five for full list)
“Contradictory advice - need to find lawyer outside the community I live in.”
“Legal professionals made judgements about me based on the fact I received benefits”.
“ FIVE: COMMENTS ON PROBLEMS EXPERIENCED WHEN WANT TO ACCESS JUSTICE SYSTEM AND UNABLE TO DO SOMy union used a lawyer based in Edinburgh, I live in Aberdeen. At the time I had to use a wheelchair as I was unable to walk. My husband had to take time off work so we could take a train and taxi to Edinburgh, we then had to get a taxi, they said it was not far to the office in fact it was up a very steep hill and so steep my husband was unable to push me up it. It cost us a fair amount of money between the fares and time off. I was not offered any rebate for this from my union who had organised this.”
“There are too many documents and rules for some disabled people to understand. My own health is also a problem, and don't have the energy to study law to do their work for them. They are so greedy they don't want the case if it takes up too much time. I read jurisprudence at uni as a philosophy student along with the lawyers, and can't believe how negligent, corrupt and greedy they are. But it's like the NHS, full of public school boys who do not see plebs as equals or worthy of the same respect they would like for themselves.”
“Too long to explain but wasn't well enough to fight the Law Society (although they did give me compensation of £500 in Scotland but in England one wouldn't have got that care) they had done this cos the solicitor was corrupt.”
4.2 Awareness of Sources of Assistance/Information
Respondents were most likely to be aware of how to find a solicitor and where to go to report a crime: 86% said they knew where to find both of these types of assistance.
Around half the respondents knew who to contact for help if they were arrested, how to get information about making a complaint and how to find out what help they could get in court.
The two areas which respondents were least aware of related to support and advice for witnesses: only 33% knew where they could get information about support for witnesses and 24% were aware of the ‘special measures’ applied to vulnerable witnesses.
Table 4.1: Awareness of sources of assistance
Base = all respondents (225)
Yes / No / Don’t know% / % / %
Would you know how to find a solicitor if you needed one? / 86 / 8 / 4
If you were the victim of a crime, would you know who to report it to? / 71 / 20 / 7
If you were arrested, would you know who to contact for help? / 53 / 36 / 9
Do you know how to get information about making a complaint about your experience of the justice system? / 48 / 40 / 9
If you had to go to court, would you know how to find out what help you can get? / 49 / 34 / 14
If you or someone you know was called as a witness in a court case, would you know where to get information about support for witnesses? / 33 / 45 / 20
Do you know about the “special measures” that can be applied for to assist vulnerable witnesses to give evidence in court? / 24 / 62 / 12
5.1 Perceptions of Helpfulness of Staff
The final section of the questionnaire asked respondents about how helpful they felt the people working in the justice system were. Given the negative comments about staff described earlier in the report (see 3.2) it was not surprising that only 30% of respondents said they thought staff working in the justice system were helpful and 28% thought that they were not helpful.
Unprompted comments (see Appendix Six) showed that disabled people had experienced very mixed attitudes from staff:
“I've been involved in three different capacities in three different cases, and the circumstances and problems were different every time. There is very little acknowledgement of the difficulties of people with hearing impairments, and legal professionals are blase about the terrors of appearing. However, the court advisor service is absolutely excellent - unfortunately, they can't sit in the court with you and hold your hand.”
“In my very limited experience contacting police for advice, some staff very dismissive and uninterested. One local PC excellent though.”
“Only going on my experience they give no thought to anyone who may need help.”
5.2 Perceptions of Staff’s Understanding of the Needs of Disabled
People
Only one in five (18%) of respondents felt that staff in the justice system understood the needs of disabled people and 48% said staff did not understand their needs. The unprompted comments (see Appendix Seven) showed that respondents felt that it was difficult for staff to understand the needs of disabled people unless they had experience of working with disabled people.
“Some staff do have a understanding of the needs but only after having someone they know or a family member who is disabled.”
“I think that it is very difficult to understand unless you actually live within the restrictions and have to work around the difficulties each day. It is the little tiddly things which are the real bug bear.”
Three respondents suggested training for staff to help overcome this lack of experience:
“More training should be given for people working in the justice system to learn how they can speak to disabled adults.”
One specific area of comment related to staff simply not understanding the type of assistance which disabled people need. One respondent had a positive experience of being offered assistance:
“Asked if I need anything - drink - chair - someone to sit with me.”
But other comments showed negative experiences of staff understanding of the assistance needed by disabled people.
“You have to ASK for aids to access. It's already intimidating to be forced into this system (even as a juror) without feeling you're making a nuisance of yourself.”
6.1 Final Comments
Final comments from respondents focused on suggestions for improving the justice system. The main suggestions related to ways of helping disabled people understand the system and the development of training to help staff in the justice system understand the needs of disabled people. The key areas are shown in Table 6.1, with the full responses in Appendices Eight and Nine.
Table 4.1Final comments - suggested area for improvement
Suggested area for improvement / No of respondentsImproving the understanding of the needs of disabled people / 24
Developing training / 15
Improving access to information / 14
Comments relating to police / 9
Improved law enforcement / 7
Better advice/support for disabled people / 7
Improving physical access / 2
Other comments / 24
This report is available in a variety of accessible formats. To discuss your requirements please contact the communications team at Capability Scotland on 0131 347 1055 or .
October 2009
Capability Scotland
11 Ellersly Road
Edinburgh
EH12 6HY
0131 347 1055
1