A communication intermediary, an autistic defendant and cross-examination: a novel Australian case

In the first case of its kind in New South Wales, Australia, a judge appointed a communication intermediary to facilitate communication for an adult defendant with autism who was on trial for sexual assault. This case study explored the role of the intermediary in assisting him to give clear and coherent evidence. In-depth analysis of transcripts of the questioning of the defendant during his evidence-in-chief and cross-examination revealed the extent of intermediary involvement or lack thereof and its effect on the quality of the defendant's evidence. Results showed lawyers adhered to the intermediary recommendations, asking mostly simple and comprehensible questions, resulting in fewer intermediary interventions than would have occurred if complex questions were asked. The defendant responded with confidence, used visual aids and sought clarification independently as needed. Implications for the justice process of expanding the current intermediary scheme in respect of vulnerable defendants are considered.