Member-only story
Autistic Witnesses in the Courtroom: A Critical Reflection
Study finds autism diagnosis increases witness reliability; advocates for a more inclusive legal system.
Autistic individuals often face unique challenges in the courtroom. Their behavior, such as avoiding eye contact or using monotone speech, can be misinterpreted by jurors, leading to biased assessments of their reliability and competence. To counteract this, it is proposed to implement diagnoses and witness support. But how effective are these measures? And are they truly sufficient to eliminate prejudices?
Australian researchers Joshua W.S. Smith and Celine van Golde, of the School of Psychology at the University of Sidney, recently conducted a study examining how jurors assess autistic witnesses.
In this article, I describe their findings and add some critical reflections from my perspective as an autistic person. The goal is to provide a nuanced view of the role of autistic witnesses in a legal system that is not yet fully aligned with the core idea of neurodiversity, which posits that all neurological functioning is equally valid.
The Study: Research on Perceptions
Smith and Van Golde’s study focused on two questions:
- Does mentioning an autism…
