Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Child Maltreat ; 23(2): 186-195, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29020792

ABSTRACT

Recent decades have seen an explosion of research into children's eyewitness capabilities and resulted in legal reform to render the adversarial trial process more child friendly. Many, however, have been left with the feeling that the most intimidating legal process for child complainants-cross-examination-has not changed meaningfully despite its potential to distort children's evidence. To test this possibility, we compared the cross-examination questioning of Australian child sexual abuse complainants in the 1950s to that used in contemporary cases. We found that the format of cross-examination questions has remained largely consistent over time, with leading questions still making up the bulk of the questions asked. The changes that we did observe, however, are concerning. Cross-examination questions posed to contemporary child complainants were less likely to be open-ended and more likely to be complex, relative to those asked in the 1950s. Crucially, contemporary complainants were asked 3 times as many cross-examination questions as they were 60 years ago. These changes are likely to have detrimental effects on child complainants and their evidence and could reduce the ability of jurors to reach just outcomes in these cases.


Subject(s)
Child Abuse, Sexual/history , Jurisprudence/history , Lawyers/history , Psychology, Child/history , Australia , Child , Child Abuse , Child Abuse, Sexual/legislation & jurisprudence , Female , History, 20th Century , History, 21st Century , Humans , Male , Mental Recall , Truth Disclosure
2.
Child Abuse Negl ; 72: 236-246, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28858640

ABSTRACT

Many child sexual abuse complainants find the adversarial trial process so distressing that they say they would never report abuse again. Their concerns stem largely from cross-examination, in which the lawyer acting for the accused attempts to discredit their evidence. We examined whether-and if so, how-Australian defense lawyers' approaches to cross-examining child sexual abuse complainants have changed meaningfully over the past 60 years. To do this, we systematically evaluated cases that were prosecuted in the 1950s, comparing them to a matched set of cases from the turn of the twenty-first century. Despite the intervening law reforms designed to improve complainants' experience in court, we found that, relative to their historical counterparts, contemporary child complainants of sexual abuse are actually subjected to far lengthier cross-examinations involving a much broader range of strategies and associated tactics. These findings have important implications for future legal practice and reform, and for the way in which these are evaluated.


Subject(s)
Child Abuse, Sexual/history , Jurisprudence/history , Lawyers/history , Australia , Child , Child Abuse, Sexual/legislation & jurisprudence , Expert Testimony , Female , History, 20th Century , History, 21st Century , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...