<p>Canadian members of the general public have poor understanding of their right to silence. Autistic people have increased rates of police involvement, and their social communication differences may put them at higher risk of misunderstanding their rights, being negatively perceived, and making self-incriminating statements. However, little is known about how Canadian autistic people understand their right to silence.&#xa0;Utilizing online participation, 32 autistic and 215 non-autistic adults engaged in a simulated police interrogation. Afterwards they responded to a series of questionnaires regarding legal comprehension and aspects of personality. A subset of 60 participants responded to an open-ended question about their decisions to provide statements and responses were analyzed thematically.&#xa0;There were no differences between autistic and non-autistic participants in either the understanding of the right to silence or in the likelihood of providing a statement. Only first language significantly predicted understanding. Greater comprehension of the right to silence was associated with decreased likelihood of making a statement. Agreeableness, conscientiousness, and negative emotionality were associated with increased likelihood. Distinct themes emerged among those who voluntarily provided statements and those who initially abstained, with several differences between autistic and non-autistic participants.&#xa0;The Canadian right to silence is poorly understood by all. Legal protections require adequate understanding of rights. Autistic people may subjectively experience legal procedures uniquely even if autism alone does not necessarily equate to poor legal understanding. A multidimensional approach that considers individual differences, communication, and comprehension is critical for equity in the legal system.</p>