Written 26th July 2026 by Ruth Peters
A plain-English guide for parents in England and Wales. This is general information, not legal advice on any individual case.
At Olliers we specialise in representing clients with autism and other neurodivergent individuals. We receive referrals from all over the country to deal with children, young people and adults who are either under investigation by the police or who are already charged with criminal offences.
Supporting Neurodivergent Clients in Criminal Cases
For many neurodivergent individuals, a criminal investigation can feel overwhelming. The environment, the questioning style, the pace, and even the sensory setting can create significant stress. That stress can then impact how someone communicates, how they process information, and how they respond to police questioning. Without the right support, their behavior can be misunderstood, and that can have a serious impact on the outcome of a case. At Olliers, we take pride in representing neurodivergent clients, including those with autism and ADHD. We recognise that the criminal justice system still has significant strides to make in ensuring fairness for neurodivergent individuals. Guiding our clients through what is often a confusing and intimidating process is a responsibility we take seriously. Our starting point is understanding each individual’s needs. Before any police interview, we speak privately with our client to identify what helps them communicate clearly and what might cause difficulty. If an appropriate adult is needed, we make sure one is present. We will engage with the police in advance to request reasonable adjustments, maybe breaks or simpler language or even altering the environment to reduce stress. During the interview itself, we are there throughout. If a question is confusing, unfair or too fast-paced, we intervene. We help ensure the client is not misunderstood or pressured into saying something that isn’t accurate. Our role is to protect the rights and create space for our clients to communicate in the way that works best for them. Some clients might struggle with open-ended questions. Others might take things literally, mask their distress, or say what they think the interviewer wants to hear just to end the situation. Many experience heightened anxiety or sensory overload in a police station. All of these factors can lead to answers that do not reflect what actually happened, which is why the right approach is so crucial. Many of our clients come to us after being contacted by the police regarding allegations of internet-based offenses, including indecent images and allegations of sexual communication. Whilst autism itself does not increase the likelihood of offending, autistic individuals are in fact often more likely to be victims of crime, it can sometimes be a contributing factor in cases related to internet use. Offences stemming from internet activity may be tied to difficulties with social relationships or misunderstandings. Autism is characterised by challenges in social communication which can sometimes manifest as repetitive behaviors, fixations or misunderstandings about social and sexual norms. For some vulnerability online may lead to mistakes, boundary misunderstandings or even being exploited or radicalised. Many of our autistic clients are of average or above average intelligence, often in professional roles. However, there can be a disconnect between their cognitive ability and their social maturity, which might align more closely with a younger age group. This disparity can create risks, particularly in online interactions where age assessments and social boundaries are much harder to navigate. We frequently represent clients who unintentionally engage in relationships with individuals below the age of consent due to such misunderstandings. In these cases, obtaining expert evidence is crucial in demonstrating intent and context. Autistic individuals may spend more time online due to social isolation, which can increase their exposure to risks such as inappropriate content or unsafe relationships. For some, the internet becomes a space to explore sexuality or educate themselves. But this can lead to unintentional exposure to illegal material. Without understanding the legal implications, they may access such material, triggering police involvement, arrest, and investigations that can be overwhelming and extremely damaging to mental health. At Olliers, we work with expert defence witnesses to provide nuanced evidence, which is vital for mitigation and achieving fair outcomes in court. Representing neurodivergent clients requires a deep understanding of how such conditions might influence behavior. While autism does not excuse illegal actions, it can provide important context that explains why somebody acted in a particular way. Many clients may lack formal diagnosis until they’re involved in a case, although often say to us they have always felt they’ve had autism or ADHD. At Olliers, we are dedicated to advocating for our neurodivergent clients. Our team is fully trained in autism and remains upto-date with legal developments and best practices. We actively campaign for improvements to ensure a fairest system for neurodivergent individuals. Our experience and commitment means we know how to navigate these complex cases and provide the best possible support for our clients. neurodivergent clients deserve a process that is fair, accessible, and properly informed. When their needs are understood and supported, the investigation becomes more humane. At Olliers, we combine our criminal defence expertise with a genuinely person centered approach so our clients feel safe, heard, and protected from the very start. If you or someone you care about is neurodivergent and facing a police interview or criminal investigation, please reach out to us early. You do not have to go through this alone. Specialist support can safeguard your rights and your well-being from the very first moment you are contacted by the police. If you require representation for yourself, a friend or family member, please contact us and we can discuss how Olliers can advise and represent in.
This is when the police question your child, or a vulnerable adult, under caution. It may happen after arrest in police custody or by a voluntary interview.
A voluntary interview is still a formal police interview under caution, and PACE Code C says the rights, entitlements and safeguards are not reduced simply because the interview is voluntary.
This is the period after the interview, and sometimes after further investigation, when the police or CPS decide whether there should be no further action, an out-of-court disposal, or a charge.
Prosecutors apply the Full Code Test, which has an evidential stage and a public interest stage, and they must consider whether evidence is admissible, reliable and credible.
In limited cases, the CPS can use the Threshold Test where an immediate charging decision is justified and there are substantial grounds to object to bail.
This starts once the person is charged or summonsed. The case moves into the court process, usually the youth court for children unless the law or the interests of justice require otherwise.
The court process must still take account of disability, neurodivergence, communication needs, effective participation, bail or remand, trial, sentence, and any medical or psychological evidence.
Neurodivergence – what the police must do differently
Police must not treat autism, ADHD or other neurodivergence as a side issue. Under PACE Code C, if an officer has any reason to suspect that a person of any age may be vulnerable, they must treat them as vulnerable unless there is clear evidence to rule that out. A person may be vulnerable if, because of a mental health condition or mental disorder, they may have difficulty understanding or communicating about arrest, detention, voluntary attendance, interview rights, questions or their answers, or if they are particularly prone to confusion, unreliable self-incrimination or agreeing to suggestions without really meaning to.
That matters because many autistic people and people with ADHD may appear calm, polite or capable while still struggling to process questions, manage sensory overload, understand legal consequences or resist pressure. PACE does not require a formal diagnosis before the police take vulnerability seriously: the police must make reasonable enquiries, record what they find, and make that information available to people who need it, including the solicitor, appropriate adult and healthcare professional. The Sentencing Council also reminds courts that many mental disorders, neurological impairments and developmental disorders are not easily recognisable, and that a formal diagnosis is not always required.
In custody, the custody officer must consider risk, welfare, clinical attention, fitness for interview, the need for an appropriate adult, and the need for an interpreter or communication assistance. If the person appears to need clinical attention, including because they appear to be suffering from a mental disorder, the custody officer must make sure they receive appropriate clinical attention as soon as reasonably practicable. PACE Annex G says fitness for interview is about whether the interview could significantly harm the person’s physical or mental state, or whether what they say may be unreliable because of their condition.
The same principles matter in voluntary interviews. The person must be told they are not under arrest and may leave unless arrested, but they must also be told their rights before being asked to agree to the interview. The NPCC guidance says a voluntary interview should not be treated any less seriously than an interview under arrest, and the interview should be arranged so the person’s rights can be fully respected. For children or vulnerable adults, that means planning ahead for legal advice, appropriate adult attendance, location, breaks, communication needs and welfare after the interview.
For children, the starting point is even stronger. Anyone who appears to be under 18 must be treated as a child unless there is clear evidence they are older. The College of Policing says children and young people are a protected group with specific vulnerabilities, and PACE Code C requires anyone who appears under 18 to be treated as a juvenile in the absence of clear evidence that they are older. Children may also have additional needs such as ADHD, autism, speech and language difficulties, trauma, low literacy or mental health problems.
Appropriate adults
An appropriate adult is not a lawyer. Their role is to help safeguard the rights, welfare and communication of a child or vulnerable person.
Government guidance says an appropriate adult is needed whenever a child under 18 or vulnerable person is arrested and detained, attends a voluntary interview under caution, or is detained for certain searches exposing intimate parts of the body. PACE Code C says the appropriate adult’s role is to support, advise and assist, help communication, help the person understand rights, and observe whether police are acting properly and fairly.
Who should be the appropriate adult?
For a child, the appropriate adult is often a parent or guardian, but not always. PACE says a parent, guardian, social worker or other responsible adult may act, but someone should not act if they are suspected of involvement, are the victim, are a witness, are involved in the investigation, or have already received admissions before acting as the appropriate adult. For a vulnerable adult, a relative, guardian, carer, someone experienced in dealing with vulnerable people, or another responsible adult may be used.
What is the role of an appropriate adult?
An appropriate adult is required for interviews with children and vulnerable people unless the strict urgent interview exceptions apply. They are not just there to sit quietly. In interview they should be told they are not expected to act simply as an observer, and their purpose is to advise the person, observe whether the interview is being conducted properly and fairly, and facilitate communication. The government guidance also says some procedures cannot take place without an appropriate adult except in very limited circumstances, including interviews, and that the person has the right to speak privately with their appropriate adult while in detention or attending a voluntary interview.
Reasonable adjustments
Reasonable adjustments are practical changes to reduce disadvantage for a disabled person. The Equality Act 2010 defines disability as a physical or mental impairment with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. The Act includes a duty to make reasonable adjustments and the CPS recognises that the public sector equality duty requires public authorities to identify disadvantages disabled defendants may experience and consider steps to remove or minimise them.
In practice, reasonable adjustments might include a quieter room, shorter questions, breaks, extra processing time, written information, avoiding jargon, allowing sensory aids, checking understanding, using visual aids, arranging a familiar appropriate adult, or seeking Liaison and Diversion input. These examples reflect the legal duty to avoid substantial disadvantage, provide auxiliary aids or services where reasonable, and adapt services or public functions so access is as close as reasonably possible to that offered to non-disabled people. In court, CPS guidance identifies possible measures such as simple clear language, court familiarisation visits, allowing family or support adults to sit near the defendant, communication aids, screens in some cases, removal of wigs and gowns, live links where statutory criteria are met, ground rules hearings, and intermediary or support arrangements where necessary for effective participation.
How neurodivergence affects interviews and evidence
Autism and ADHD can affect how a person understands, remembers, communicates and reacts under pressure. Some people answer literally, struggle with open questions, take longer to process, miss implied meanings, become overwhelmed by noise or unfamiliar surroundings, or agree with a suggestion to end distress. PACE expressly recognises vulnerability where a person may not understand the significance of questions or replies, may become confused, may provide unreliable or incriminating information without meaning to, or may accept suggestions without consciously wishing to do so.
Masking can make this harder. A young person may look “fine” while using huge effort to appear normal.
This can affect the reliability of evidence. CPS mental health guidance says prosecutors should consider whether PACE safeguards were observed, whether a confession may be unreliable, and what weight to attach to a confession when mental health or neurodiversity is a live issue. PACE also warns that although vulnerable people may often provide reliable evidence, they may without knowing or wanting to do so be prone to unreliable, misleading or self-incriminating information, so special care and corroboration are important.
For children, the CPS says care is needed when assessing mens rea because children may not appreciate consequences or risks in the same way as adults. CPS guidance also says children may be more susceptible than adults to making adverse statements because of peer pressure or pressure of circumstances, and their mental development may be relevant to the reliability of what they say. This is why interview planning, disclosure, breaks, appropriate adults, legal advice and careful question style can affect the whole case.
At the pre-charge stage, neurodivergence may be relevant to whether there is enough evidence, whether an interview answer is reliable, whether there is a defence, whether further enquiries are needed, whether diversion is suitable, and whether prosecution is in the public interest. CPS guidance says investigators should notify prosecutors when a suspect’s mental health condition or disorder may be a live issue, and information may come from the suspect, family, friends, defence representative, treatment professionals, Liaison and Diversion, EHCPs, psychological reports, ADOS assessments, interview concerns, admissions and their context, and any defence raised.
What to tell your solicitor immediately
If your child is arrested or invited for interview, tell the solicitor everything relevant to communication, vulnerability and context. Do this privately and early. Do not coach your child on what to say to police, and do not delete or alter evidence. The solicitor needs accurate information to advise whether to answer questions, give a prepared statement, ask for delays, request adjustments, challenge the interview plan, or make pre-charge representations.
Parent checklist
Tell the solicitor:
- Age and status: whether the person is under 18, looked after, in foster care, under social care, or has a Youth Justice Service worker. Children are treated differently, and a child under 10 cannot be guilty of a criminal offence, while children aged 10 to 17 may enter the youth justice system.
- Diagnoses or suspected conditions: autism, ADHD, learning disability, dyslexia, dyspraxia, anxiety, depression, trauma, brain injury, sensory processing difficulties or speech and language needs. CPS guidance expressly includes autism, learning disability, learning difficulty and other cognitive or neurodiverse conditions.
- Education evidence: EHCP, school support plans, SEN records, exclusions, PRU attendance, educational psychologist reports, CAMHS involvement, or support staff who know the child. CPS guidance identifies EHCPs, educational or clinical psychologist reports, ADOS assessments and family information as potentially relevant material for charging decisions.
- Medication and health: prescribed medication, whether it was taken at the time, sleep, meltdowns, shutdowns, self-harm risk, panic, sensory triggers and any recent crisis. CPS guidance says medication, treatment and current assessments may be relevant to charge decisions.
- Communication profile: whether the person answers literally, says “yes” to please adults, freezes, talks too much when anxious, struggles with dates, masks distress, misunderstands jokes or sarcasm, or needs questions broken down.
- Interview needs: quiet room, breaks, food, water, written prompts, extra processing time, no rapid-fire questions, no repeated questions unless explained, and a clear appropriate adult.
- Digital or factual context: messages, CCTV, location data, witnesses, school records or social context that may support the defence. The Code for Crown Prosecutors says suspects or representatives may submit evidence or information to help inform the prosecutor’s decision before or after charge.
- Pre-charge material: anything that may help show no charge should be brought, such as expert evidence, school evidence, family statements, treatment information, or evidence that an admission is unreliable. Olliers internal material states that pre-charge submissions should include available documentation and relevant information that could influence decision-making.
How Olliers approaches these cases
Olliers recognises that the criminal justice system still has significant progress to make for neurodiverse individuals, and takes seriously the responsibility of guiding clients through a confusing and intimidating process.
In practical terms, the best-practice approach across the police interview stage is to identify needs early, make sure the police understand them, secure legal advice and an appropriate adult where required, challenge unfair questioning, and consider whether a prepared statement, no comment interview or full answers are safest.
At the pre-charge stage, the strongest approach is not to wait passively. At Olliers we advocate proactive pre-charge support, including staying in regular contact with police, gathering defence evidence early, taking statements, collecting digital material and presenting material to police or prosecutors as part of an argument that the person should not be charged. representations to the CPS pre-charge as “CRUCIAL” and suggests alternative sources such as SEN material, school information, key workers and GP material where expert funding is difficult pre-charge.
At the post-charge stage, best practice is to keep reassessing communication and participation. The CPS says every effort should be made, using reasonable adjustments, to ensure a defendant can effectively participate in a trial, and that the pre-trial and trial process should be adapted where necessary to enable comprehension and engagement with the defence. Olliers training materials refer to court-stage issues including specialist medical reports, functioning, fitness to plead, visual cues, short attention span and reluctance to speak up.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. A voluntary interview is still a formal interview under caution, and the same core rights and safeguards apply. The NPCC guidance says it should not be treated less seriously than an arrest interview.
Often yes, but not if you are a witness, victim, suspect, involved in the investigation, or have already received admissions before acting in that role. If you cannot act, the police should arrange another appropriate adult.
Yes, ask. PACE allows an appropriate adult to request legal advice for a child or vulnerable person even if the person has declined it, although the person cannot be forced to speak to the solicitor if they remain adamant.
Yes. The issue is not just the label, but how the person understands, communicates and copes. PACE requires action where vulnerability is suspected unless clear evidence dispels it.
Not automatically. It may affect intent, understanding, reliability of admissions, the public interest decision, fitness to plead, effective participation, sentencing or disposal, depending on the facts.
decision, consider diversion or an out-of-court disposal, or charge. The CPS applies the evidential and public interest stages of the Full Code Test, unless the limited Threshold Test applies.
Yes. The Code says suspects or their representatives may submit evidence or information before or after charge to help inform the prosecutor’s decision. In neurodivergence cases, that may include medical, school, family, Liaison and Diversion and interview-related material.
How Olliers Can Help
If your child has autism, ADHD or another form of neurodivergence and is facing a police investigation or criminal charge, it is completely understandable to feel worried, overwhelmed and unsure where to turn. The criminal justice system can be challenging to navigate, particularly when communication, sensory needs or vulnerability are not immediately recognised.
At Olliers, we have extensive experience representing children, young people and adults with autism, ADHD and other neurodivergent conditions. We understand that every client is different, and we take the time to ensure their needs are identified, understood and properly taken into account from the very start of a case.
Whether your child has been arrested, invited to attend a voluntary interview, released under investigation or charged with an offence, early legal advice can make a significant difference. Our team can advise on police interviews, appropriate adults, reasonable adjustments, pre-charge representations and court proceedings, while helping families understand what to expect at every stage.
You do not have to face this process alone. To speak with a member of our specialist criminal defence team, contact Olliers today for confidential, expert advice. We are here to listen, support and fight for the best possible outcome for your child and your family. Call 0161 834 1515, email info@olliers.com or complete our online enquiry form and we will get back to you promptly.
- About the Author
- Latest Posts
Ruth leads the business development team at Olliers across all areas of specialism. Ruth was the Manchester Legal Awards 2021 Solicitor of the Year.
She has been with the firm for more than 20 years and has an enviable level of experience across the entire spectrum of criminal defence.