Unlike health settings, intermediaries have no standard approach to assessments for justice system purposes. It depends on the intermediary, the requirements of the case and the capabilities of the witness. The intermediary may conclude that the witness simply does not have the ability to give evidence, even with assistance.

Assessment is not always straightforward: some people are willing to discuss with the intermediary issues that affect them (one witness described herself as having “that bipolar bear thingy where you go up and down”) but many others have spent a lifetime covering up their communication and literacy difficulties, especially to anyone in authority. However, it is unusual for the offer of intermediary assistance to be declined.

Police officers, lawyers and judges often change in the course of a single case but, continuity of intermediary through assessment, interview and trial is important to ensure familiarity with the witness’s communication and establish trust. Assessment underpins intermediary recommendations about adapting questioning techniques and procedures at the police interview and at court. If a recommendation is challenged, intermediaries must be able to justify it based on their assessment findings. Intermediaries are not expert witnesses and their report is not part of the evidence, but they must keep notes of their assessment which could be disclosed at trial. In certain circumstances the assessment may be filmed, for example where a young child may make a spontaneous disclosure about the alleged offence or if the witness uses a communication method that must be demonstrated to be transparent.

This is how one intermediary who works with children explains her assessments in her court reports. The principles are of general application: