Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in the Courtroom: Achieving a More Accurate Assessment of Guilt

Author: Peter Knight, Graduating PPL Fourth Year, Class of 2024

As the title suggests, this paper focuses on how intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) are considered in the criminal legal system in the United States. It shows how those with disabilities are often interacting with our courts at higher rates and it shows one way to address this. Evidence of intellectual and/or developmental disability is not admissible in most states prior to the sentencing stage of a criminal trial. This paper argues that the current rule of IDDs being considered inadmissible evidence when determining criminal intent in most U.S. state courts causes crimes to not be properly understood and determined. This is unjust, unequal, and exemplifies systemic ableism. To achieve a more equitable justice system, courts should permit the introduction of an IDD as evidence during the guilt phase of trials, as it directly impacts the assessment of a crime. This change could have further implications such as causing people to take plea bargains less often.

Key words: Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Criminal Justice, Criminal Intent, Systemic Ableism

---

Below you will find a copy of Peter's full PPL Senior Thesis:

Knight PPL Thesis Final Draft.pdf

Download PDF • 346KB