By Regina Negrete
April 5, 2009
The Deaf Community and the Criminal Justice System
With the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), deaf and
other disabled persons were provided with landmark civil rights legislation.
It provided legal protections in employment, access to state and local
government and public transportation, public accommodations, and
telecommunications. Included is a requirement that police agencies and the
courts use qualified to communicate with victims, witnesses, and suspects
who are deaf or hard of hearing. (McCay et. al. 2001)
Deaf offenders are described as those who have a severe to profound hearing
loss and are unable to understand speech, with or without the use of
amplification such as hearing aids. Hard-of-hearing offenders typically have
a mild, moderate or even severe hearing loss. They may be able to understand
speech in specific conditions, such as when using hearing aids and
communicating one-on-one in a small, quiet room with good lighting. (Miller
2002)
There is no mandate to report police interaction with people who have
disabilities. The Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Division of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation, which is the most widely recognized and accepted center
for collection of crime data, maintains no information on people who have
disabilities. (McCay et. al. 2001) The first point of contact with a hard of
hearing person, or person with disabilities usually occurs at the point of
arrest or during the investigation of a crime prior to arrest.” There is no
mandate that police agencies have written policies on interviewing deaf
suspects. Most police agencies lack procedures to govern the way in which
interpreters and other support services are used during pre- and post arrest
interviews with deaf suspects." (McCay et. al. 2001)
To ensure equal access to programs, services, and activities conduct an
intake assessment is taken as soon as possible with each offender who stays
in custody to determine communication needs that will assist in recommending
appropriate accommodations, i.e., qualified interpreter, closed caption for
television and videos, inmate orientation video with sign language, and
captioning and TTY/TTD devices. (Baker2007) Inmates are classified in
jails/prisons by their prior convictions, gang affiliations, and level of
aggression. "Deaf offenders who use sign language live together in one
facility, mostly in one cellblock." (Miller 2002)
When a deaf suspect is charged in a homicide or other major crime, police
mistakes are increasingly more likely to be brought to the attention of the
court by defense attorneys. One result may be the release of confessed and
otherwise guilty felons because evidence is found to be inadmissible in
court due to procedural errors in interrogation. (McCay et. al. 2001)
Protecting the individual rights of deaf suspects within the criminal
justice system is complicated by the diagnostic complexities associated with
these persons. For example, prelingual deaf criminals frequently experience
marked linguistic deficits, have an increased probability of brain damage
and mental disorders. (McCay et. al. 2001) Most facilities do not have
enough inmates with hearing loss to fiscally justify hiring a full-time
staff interpreter. Therefore, decisions have to be made about when to
provide one. Medical care, disciplinary and internal legal proceedings, and
education are obvious settings in which gestures or other makeshift visual
communication will not be adequate. (Miller 2002)
The deaf and hard of hearing community are very under represented in the
criminal justice field they are not heard of too often. I have been studying
criminal justice for three years now and this is the first time I ever
stopped to think about them in the system. I have always studied the
mentally ill and the minds of murderers but this blog caught me so off guard
than what I expected. Its hard to find articles about them to even write on
that’s how much they are not spoken about.
Baker, Eileen D., Sheriff. Alexandria Legal Implications for Deaf and Hard
of Hearing Offenders in Corrections: Risks and Opportunities Jan/Feb 2007.
Vol. 59, Iss. 1; p. 11 (2 pages)
McCay Vernon Lawrence J. Raifman Sheldon F. Greenberg and Brendan Monteiro
2001 Elsevier Science Inc. Forensic pretrial police interviews of deaf
suspects avoiding legal pitfalls International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
January-February 2001, Pages 43-59
Miller, Katrina R. Population management strategies for deaf and
hard-of-hearing offendersCorrections Today. Lanham: Dec 2002. Vol. 64, Iss.
7; p. 90 (5 pages)