No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Rape Victims' Experiences of Giving Evidence in English Courts: A Survey
Abstract
Nineteen rape victims who had given evidence in court in English courts were interviewed. Questions concerned their examination in court, their perceptions of the criminal justice system, particularly criminal court processes, and the perceived utility of 'special measures' to facilitate giving evidence. Participants believed that prosecution lawyers generally did not accuse them of lying, attack what they said, put their character in doubt, put words in their mouth or use trick or leading questions. Defence lawyers were perceived to be significantly more likely to use these techniques. Participants reported that they felt they understood what was going on and, importantly, felt that they were reasonably able to give accurate evidence. They generally showed high levels of satisfaction with the way they had been treated, and positive attitudes towards measures to make giving evidence less stressful. Yes Yes
... Victims of rape 1 describe cross-examination as the most distressing part of their experience within the criminal justice system (Kebbell et al. 2007). Although a plethora of law reforms in common law countries have been implemented since the 1970s with the aim of improving aspects of the criminal justice response for rape complainants, the feeling is that 'nothing has changed' (Lees 1996). ...
... What about improvements in rape complainants' experiences of the criminal justice process? Here again, there are some indications that reforms may have been successful (Kebbell et al. 2007;Kingi and Jordan 2009;Stern 2010). In a survey of 19 rape complainants who had given evidence in court, for example, most participants reported that they were generally satisfied with the criminal justice response (Kebbell et al. 2007). ...
... Here again, there are some indications that reforms may have been successful (Kebbell et al. 2007;Kingi and Jordan 2009;Stern 2010). In a survey of 19 rape complainants who had given evidence in court, for example, most participants reported that they were generally satisfied with the criminal justice response (Kebbell et al. 2007). Complainants felt that they understood courtroom procedures and reported that they were reasonably able to give accurate evidence (Kebbell et al. 2007). ...
Despite widespread reforms to legislation and policy, rape complainants still find cross-examination distressing, demeaning
and humiliating. We conducted a systematic and holistic examination of cross-examination strategies to discern: (1) the range
of tactics that defence lawyers use to challenge rape complainants’ accounts; and (2) whether—and if so, how—the approaches
used currently differ from those used prior to the reforms. We compared the strategies and tactics used in cases that were
prosecuted in the 1950s to those used in cases from the turn of the twenty-first century. Although contemporary complainants
were subjected to lengthier cross-examinations involving a broader range of tactics than their historical counterparts, there
was little difference in the breakdown of strategies and tactics across time periods.
... Indeed, adult witnesses often make changes to their evidence during these cross-examination style questions (Valentine and Maras, 2011;Westera et al., 2017b;Zajac and Cannan, 2009). In addition to impairing accuracy, cross-examination is the most distressing part of evidence-sharing for adult sexual assault complainants (Kebbell et al., 2007;Konradi, 1999). Prior to considering whether legislation should be introduced to place limitations on the scope and nature of cross-examination of adult sexual assault complainants, it is helpful to obtain the perspectives of criminal justice professionals on the utility of this reform. ...
... In a survey of alleged victims of sexual offences in the UK, 44 per cent of adult respondents indicated that they would not have given evidence without special measures (Hamlyn et al., 2004). In another survey of women who had given evidence in rape trials, nearly 80 per cent of respondents were supportive of the special measure of video-recorded police interviews as evidence (Kebbell et al., 2007). Second, using pre-recorded interviews as evidence has the potential to improve the quality of testimonial evidence given by witnesses. ...
Cases of historic child assault typically rely on the complainant's narrative due to lack of corroborating evidence. Although it is important that complainants give their best evidence, concern has been expressed that evidence-sharing procedures are suboptimal. This study explored criminal justice professionals’ perspectives on the utility of introducing reforms to the evidence-sharing process. We interviewed judges, prosecutors, defence counsel and witness assistance officers ( N = 43) on the utility of regulating the questioning of complainants and of using video-recorded interviews as evidence-in-chief. Many professionals perceived that adult complainants of child assault were vulnerable and supported reforms to evidence-sharing. Primary objections to these reforms were the belief that all adult complainants should share evidence in the same way and the poor quality of investigative interviews. This study illuminates potential barriers to the implementation of reforms which would change how adult complainants of child assault give evidence.
... Indeed, high profile stories in the media have highlighted the devastating impact giving evidence in court can have on victim-survivors of sexual violence (Cramb, 2002;Burman, 2009;Walker, 2013;Storey, 2015) and this has also been observed in academic research (Smith, 2018;Hester and Lilley, 2018). Victim-survivors often report feeling silenced, confused, and humiliated by cross-examination, leading to retraumatisation and claims that victim-survivors feel that it is them on trial rather than the defendant (Adler, 1987;Lees, 2002;Konradi, 2007;Kebbell, O'Kelly and Gilchrist, 2007;Wheatcroft, Wagstaff and Moran, 2009;Smith and Daly, 2020). Similar feelings have been highlighted in relation to people with mental health problems who have been victims of assault more generally (Pettitt, et al., 2013) and interestingly the majority of the victims quoted in Pettitt et al.'s (2013) research in relation to negative court experiences were female and were referring to sexual or domestic violence. ...
... For example, a favoured tactic for cross-examination is the use of closed, leading questions because they are known to contaminate memory and lead to answers more consistent with the question as opposed to fact (Loftus, Miller, and Burns, 1978;Sharman and Powell, 2012). Kebbell et al. (2007) found that cross-examination of victim-survivors often focuses on very minute details, again demonstrating reliance on the unrealistic expectation that victim-survivors have highly detailed memories of the event. ...
This PhD explored the role of rape myths and cultural narratives in serious sexual offences trials in England. The relationship between rape myths and cultural narratives that reflect structural oppressions such as sexism, classism, and ableism, is important to examine in the context of trials because attrition evidence shows that minoritised and marginalised women face particular barriers when accessing criminal justice. Court observations were used because they provide insight into the overarching trial narrative that is unaffected by participant recall (as would be the case in using interview and survey methods). Data were analysed using an intersectional feminist frame informed by critical discourse analysis, both of which focus on power structures. The key findings were that rape myths continue to permeate trial narratives, that they are re/produced by oppressive cultural narratives, and that these work together to undermine the credibility of victim-survivors. Structural inequalities and systems of oppression are reflected, often subtly, in the narratives deployed by barristers at trial and thus the credibility of victim-survivors is undermined in relation to how they are perceived and portrayed. These findings show that it is important to look beyond rape myths as an explanation for poor justice outcomes for victim-survivors of sexual violence and that structural inequalities and systems of oppression should be properly considered in future research, policy, and reform.
... Taslitz (1999) suggests this creates 'macho adversarialism', which promotes rationality and aggression (see also Collier, 1998); encouraging routine victim degradation because the focus is on winning rather than justice (see also Ellison, 2000). Although some victims find that the trial was better than they expected (Kebbell et al, 2007); barristers frequently confuse, coerce and silence victims (Taslitz, 1999). Ellison (2000) links this to questioning techniques such as extensive repetition, frequent interruption, closed questions and demanding precise recollection of peripheral details (Ellison, 2000). ...
... Ellison (2000) links this to questioning techniques such as extensive repetition, frequent interruption, closed questions and demanding precise recollection of peripheral details (Ellison, 2000). Other authors refer to the use of irrelevant (Heenan and McKelvie, 1997) or leading questions, undertake 'pining out' viii and gradually refine witness' comments to coincide with their argument (Kebbell et al, 2007). Ellison, (2000) and Smith (2009) suggest these techniques are 'justified' by barristers and judges in reference to their client's interests and judges' ability stop anything improper. ...
Despite years of policy reform in England and Wales, court responses to rape and sexual assault victims remain inadequate. Existing literature often relies on interviews, is outdated by policy, or ignores underlying assumptions. This study therefore observed rape and sexual assault trials, identifying underlying assumptions using critical discourse analysis (CDA). The main themes that arose were routine delays, notions of "rational" behavior, extreme interpretations of "beyond reasonable doubt" (BRD) and "burden of proof," and winning as priority. These highlight the need to move beyond prioritizing shorter term change and begin addressing the fundamental inadequacies of court responses to rape and sexual assault victims.
... Further still, immediate selfdocumentation can preserve memory accuracy over time (Gabbert et al., 2022;Stevens et al., 2022), and reduce susceptibility to misleading post-event information . This is particularly important in GBV cases because the victim's account is often the primary, if not only, source of evidence (Kebbell et al., 2007). Actual or perceived gaps or inconsistencies in victim accounts can diminish prosecution odds, as officials may think gaps and inconsistencies signal that the victim lacks credibility (Freyd, 2004). ...
Introduction
Gender-based violence (GBV) is under-reported to the authorities owing to the stigma, shame, and fear of reprisal that surrounds these crimes. To address this, there has been an influx of technologies, including mobile phone and online applications that allow victim-survivors (hereafter, victims) to document and report GBV (hereafter referred to as GBVxTech). We critically analysed the extent to which GBVxTech applications align with the scientific knowledge base on gathering accounts of crimes from victims and witnesses.
Methods
We identified 41 reporting and evidence building applications from around the world but found many (n = 19) were no longer accessible. A total of 13 applications met the study criteria and were available for download. We evaluated each application on how well its design and features align with established minimum best practice standards for gathering complete and accurate accounts from witnesses and victims, such as the pre-interview instructions (e.g., setting ground rules), questioning approach (e.g., using open-ended questions), and the adequacy of security features (e.g., password protection).
Results and Discussion
We found most applications employ open questions, encourage victims to report information in an independent voice, and seek to elicit information pertinent to a criminal investigation. None of the applications use leading questions. However, most applications do not establish ground rules, and many use forced-choice questions, do not time stamp the information gathered, or document when users change their answers. Many applications have limited security features, potentially compromising users’ safety. Further, some applications do not provide information about how to use the app, an informed consent procedure, or data usage information. We discuss the findings and offer recommendations for future GBVxTech development.
... From 2019 to 2021, 1.6 million adults aged 16-74 years sustained rape or attempted rape in the United Kingdom (Office for National Statistics, 2021). A rape complainant's statements and testimony are often the primary, if not only evidence, to support an allegation (Tetreault, 1989;Lees, 2002;Kebbell et al., 2007). Whether criminal charges are brought depends on the credibility of the complainant's account and whether it can be corroborated by other evidence. ...
Objective
To test whether acute alcohol intoxication and alcohol expectancy affects how accurately women remember consensual and non-consensual sexual activity that occurred during an interactive hypothetical dating scenario.
Design
A balanced placebo randomized study that varied alcohol dose (mean Breath Alcohol Content; BrAC = 0.06%) and alcohol expectancy prior to participants encoding a hypothetical interactive rape scenario was implemented. Participants could elect to consent to sexual activity with a male partner in the hypothetical scenario. If they stopped consenting, non-consensual sexual intercourse (i.e., rape) was described. Seven days later, participants’ memory for consensual and non-consensual sexual activity in the scenario was tested.
Main outcome measures
Memory accuracy, confidence, and feelings of intoxication.
Results
A total of 90 females (M age = 20.5, SD = 2.2) were tested regarding their memory accuracy for the consensual and non-consensual sexual activities in the scenario. A multi-level logistic regression predicting memory accuracy for the perpetrator’s behaviors during the rape indicated no effect of alcohol intoxication. However, a main effect of alcohol expectancy was found, whereby participants who expected to consume alcohol, compared to those who did not, recalled the perpetrator’s behaviors during the rape more accurately. A second regression predicting memory accuracy for consensual sexual activity found no main effects for alcohol intoxication or alcohol expectancy. Participants recalled consensual sexual activity with a high degree of accuracy. Calibration analyses indicated that accuracy increased with confidence level, regardless of intoxication level or alcohol expectancy condition, but that women tended to be overconfident in general.
Conclusion
This study provides an important test of how accurately women remember consensual and non-consensual sexual activities. The accuracy of this information is important for forensic medical examinations and police investigations following an allegation of sexual assault. Increased memory accuracy was found for offence details when participants expected to consume alcohol, suggesting there may be important differences in attentional processes (e.g., hypervigilance) depending on whether threat is present. Further research is necessary to investigate memory for sexual violence in real-world settings and to test methods for ascertaining the most complete and reliable accounts.
... Investigative interviews are crucial in investigating SV. The survivor's memory evidence is often the primary evidence to support the accusation (Kebbell et al., 2007), and therefore needs to be gathered using evidence-based interview methods. The need for culturally aware and context-sensitive interview approaches for investigating SV is especially urgent and pertinent in contexts with heightened gender inequality (Fatusi & Oyeledun, 2002;Yodanis, 2004). ...
The pursuit of justice increasingly relies on productive interactions between witnesses and investigators from diverse cultural backgrounds during investigative interviews. To date, the role of cultural context has largely been ignored by researchers in the field of investigative interviewing, despite repeated requests from practitioners and policymakers for evidence-based guidance for the conduct of interviews with people from different cultures. Through examining cultural differences in human memory and communication and considering specific contextual challenges for investigative interviewing through the lens of culture, this review and associated commentaries highlight the scope for considering culture and human diversity in research on, and the practice of, investigative interviewing with victims, witnesses, and other sources. Across 11 commentaries, contributors highlight the importance of considering the role of culture in different investigative interviewing practices (e.g., rapport building, questioning techniques) and contexts (e.g., gender-based violence, asylum seeking, child abuse), address common areas of cultural mismatch between interviewer–interviewee expectations, and identify critical future routes for research. We call for an increased focus in the investigative interviewing literature on the nature and needs of our global community and encourage constructive and collaborative discussion between researchers and practitioners from around the world to better identify specific challenges and work together towards evidence-based solutions. © 2021 The Authors. Legal and Criminological Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society
... Essentially the introduction of the video recorded interview has allowed researchers to assess and improve the practice and policy of police to improve outcomes by viewing these recorded interviews and developing a model to address any shortcomings (Baldwin, 1992;. Further, the recorded interview has been shown to provide more complete and reliable accounts from witnesses (Westera, Kebbell, & Milne, 2013) and, in the case of rape victims, removed the stress of having to provide testimony in court (Kebbell, O'Kelly, & Gilchrist, 2007). This research demonstrates the benefits that academics and practitioners can achieve when working together to improve outcomes. ...
National security priorities, result-oriented pressures, and cost sensitivity are common features of contemporary policing. While the global shift to evidence-based policing (EBP) increased police reliance on behavioral science research on interrogation and interviews, skepticism about the effectiveness of “soft” science is pervasive and “hard” sciences have been privileged. Psychologists have consequently been challenged to fulfill their roles in compliance with the four key principles that underpin psychologists' codes of ethics, namely, respect for rights and dignity, competent caring, integrity, and social responsibility. This chapter reviews the alignment of these principles with the relational skills implicit in the four tenets of the leading theory in international police practice, procedural justice (PJ). An analysis of research constructs applied in contemporary interviewing research demonstrated the integral connection between these relational skills and effective interviewing of high-value detainees. These links are present both in a “ticking bomb” scenario as well as less exigent contexts. By mapping the links between ethical principles, PJ tenets, relational research constructs and outcomes, this chapter offers a potential framework for behavioral scientists in policing contexts to develop their ethical literacy and better articulate and evaluate potential ethical issues in their practice. Adherence to PJ tenets can reduce psychologists' role conflicts and facilitate the ethical practice of psychology and EBP.
... Prosecutors have also noted that long and detailed accounts generate more opportunities for defence lawyers to discredit complainants. Indeed, complainants whose cases proceed to trial are subjected to lengthy cross-examinations that focus on minor inconsistencies within and across their accounts (Kebbell, O'Kelly, & Gilchrist, 2007;Zydervelt, Zajac, Kaladelfos, & Westera, 2017). ...
Investigating sexual assault is one of the most challenging tasks in modern-day policing. Because investigators must rely largely on the account provided by the complainant to establish whether or not a criminal offence has occurred, the way in which these accounts are elicited becomes paramount. Although there is a strong empirical consensus on how to maximise the completeness and accuracy of eyewitness accounts, several researchers have suggested modifying adult sexual assault interview protocols to better satisfy investigative and evidential needs and to provide complainants with a greater level of emotional support. This article explores professional stakeholders’ views on what form these changes might take, and identifies the broad themes that drive these views.
... Finally, prosecutors state that long and detailed accounts generate more "ammunition" for defence lawyers to discredit complainants (Mussa et al., 2018;. Indeed, complainants whose cases proceed to trial are subjected to lengthy cross-examinations that often focus on minor inconsistencies within and across their accounts, or memory gaps for highly peripheral details (Kebbell et al., 2007;Taylor, 2004;Zydervelt, Zajac, Kaladelfos, & Westera, 2017). Socio-legal scholars have expressed concern that this approach could exert a detrimental and unreasonable effect on trial outcomes (e.g., Taylor, 2004;Temkin, 2000Temkin, , 2002Temkin & Krahé, 2008), and extant research tells us that this concern could be warranted. ...
... In the present study, police interviewers most frequently created original labels for occurrences, whereas defence lawyers replaced labels most often; they replaced both their own labels and labels created by children more often than would be expected by chance. Cross-examination procedures with children have already been criticized for a variety of reasons (Kebbell, O'Kelly, & Gilchrist, 2007;Zajac, Gross, & Hayne, 2003;Zydervelt, Zajac, Kaladelfos, & Westera, 2017), and the current study has identified another way in which defence lawyers may impede children's reporting. Irrespective of whether defence lawyers are aware that they are replacing labels, doing so may elicit inconsistencies in children's accounts if label replacement contributes to further confusions between occurrences of repeated events. ...
Purpose
Labelling (i.e., naming) individual occurrences of repeated abuse allegations with explicit and consistent terms may improve children’s reporting of these offences. The aim of the present study was to track labels for occurrences of alleged child sexual abuse from the police interview to court proceedings.
Methods
We examined the labels used in the police interviews and trials of 23 child complainants (5 to 15 years old at interview). The initiator of each label (child, interviewer, lawyer, or judge), stage of the process in which the label was generated, and the type of information used to label specific occurrences of abuse were recorded. Any subsequent re-use or replacement of the labels was also recorded.
Results
Most labels were created by police interviewers. Few children generated labels. Most occurrences of abuse were labelled early in the legal process; 82% were first labelled either in the police interview or the prosecution’s opening statement. The labels were frequently replaced with alternate terms, with an average of three different labels for the same incident. After original labels were established for occurrences, they were just as likely to be replaced as they were to be reused. The most frequently observed label replacement was by defense lawyers during cross-examination.
Conclusions
Labels were used inconsistently throughout the police interview and trial. To give children the best chance of describing specific occurrences of abuse during legal proceedings, labels should be created from children’s words wherever possible and used consistently thereafter by all justice professionals.
... Evaluations have also highlighted several difficulties with how special measures are used. Initially, this was about courts not having the correct facilities ( Kebbell et al., 2007;Payne, 2009), but the Home Office (2007) subsequently invested in extending video technology and the Ministry of Justice (2012) further committed to widening use of video facilities at trial. Even where video technology is available, though, critics have noted that visual and acoustic quality can be poor ( Baverstock, 2016;HMCPSI, 2007). ...
English and Welsh rape trials have long been recognized as problematic, with research highlighting the prevalence of rape myths, sexual history evidence and manipulative questioning at trial. Despite this extensive literature, little attention has been paid to the more practical elements of rape trials, but the limited evidence that does exist suggests these may significantly impact survivors. This article therefore draws upon 13 months of court observations to examine how seemingly mundane aspects of rape trials can present substantial barriers to participation. It will argue that ‘special measures’ can cause delays, some witness facilities are inadequate and that the public gallery is frequently a site of intimidation. Ultimately, the research highlights simple changes that could increase opportunities for survivor justice; for example ensuring rape survivors use judicial entrances to court.
... For this alternative measure, the video-recorded interview is played to the judge or jury, followed by any supplementary questions from the prosecutor and cross-examination by defence counsel. Video-evidence is likely to improve both the completeness and reliability of a complainant's testimony (see Loftus & Palmer, 1974;Read & Connolly, 2007;Westera, Kebbell, & Milne, 2013b), and reduce the stress on the complainant of having to recall evidence-in-chief in the courtroom (Burton, Evans, & Sanders, 2006;Deffenbacher, Bornstein, Penrod, & McGorty, 2004;Hamlyn, Phelps, Turtle, & Sattar, 2004;Kebbell, O'Kelly, & Gilchrist, 2007). Despite these potential benefits, many prosecutors are reluctant to apply to use video-evidence with adults (Criminal Justice Joint Inspection, 2009;Stern, 2010;Triggs, Mossman, Jordan, & Kingi, 2009). ...
This study explored the perceptions of ten Crown Prosecutors about the utility of police interviews as video evidence-in-chief for adult sexual assault complainants to determine how to improve these interviews. A themed analysis of prosecutors’ responses indicated three major concerns about these interviews: the interviewer using wordy instructions, the lack of chronology and logical structure, and the relentless pursuit of unnecessary detail. These findings suggest that prosecutors’ concerns are primarily due to police using cognitive inter- view methods that attempt to enhance the amount of detail recalled by a complainant. The authors discuss why generating large amounts of detail may be problematic in interviews with sexual assault complainants and provide recommendations for how police can adapt inter- view practices to better meet evidential needs.
... First, it may improve the process for the complainant by reducing the stress of having to give evidence in an open court. Vulnerable witnesses report the use of video evidence would improve their ability to give evidence (Burton, Evans, & Sanders, 2006;Hamlyn, Phelps, Turtle, & Sattar, 2004;Kebbell, O'Kelly, & Gilchrist, 2007). Second, contextual details associated with video evidence are likely to promote more complete and accurate information from the complainant. ...
Four studies investigated lawyers' concerns that the narrative style of police interviews with adult rape complainants reduces the impact of this interview as video evidence. Study 1 (N = 96) compared mock juror perceptions of simulated evidence-in-chief either in traditional short-answer or narrative style and found testimony style was not a predictor of complainant credibility. Studies 2 (N = 104), 3 (N = 102) and 4 (N = 102) examined different variables that change with testimony style—the number of questions asked, overall testimony length and response length. The number of questions asked was the only predictor of complainant credibility; more questions resulted in higher credibility ratings. These findings suggest that lawyers' concerns about narrative style interviewing are unwarranted. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
... Being cross-examined remains one of the significant concerns of complainants in sexual cases; however there are obvious limits to what may be done to address such concerns within the current model of adversarial trial process (Kebbell, 2007). Such a party-driven model brings with it stated duties of a defence lawyer including protecting their client "so far is as possible from being convicted" (Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2008) and providing the client "with fearless, vigorous and effective defence" (Code of Conduct). ...
For many years, across many jurisdictions, empirical research has replicated the concerns of women complainants in rape cases. In New Zealand the reforms of the mid-80s have still not significantly addressed the distress felt by those who are just witnesses for the prosecution with very little protection from often harsh and unnecessary cross-examination. The 2006 acquittal of three police officers charged with historical sexual offending put trial process reform in rape cases back on the political agenda. In this short piece, some of the possible reforms that may yet assist those women who take the stand are outlined.
Participation in, and attendance at, court often positions people amid a charged emotional environment, where the evidence frequently involves distressing accounts and the stakes of decision-making are high. Research has explored the impact of this environment on various court protagonists. What this research has failed to consider in detail, however, are the ways in which such vectors of emotional reaction, containment and contagion interact and flow across the criminal court space: yielding affective environments in which emotion is not a commodity held (or denied) by one person, but a force that permeates and seeps into the spaces of justice. In this article, we set out the case for why such an understanding is necessary and instructive.
In this chapter, an outline is provided of how a psychological research evidence base can be developed, and put into practice, to enhance criminal investigations. A case example is provided whereby police approached the psychologists to develop a way of identifying the location of murder victims' bodies. The methodology relies on a staged approach: First, identifying if the problem is sufficient to warrant attention; Second, to refine the problem so that the most important practical aspects are identified; Third, to develop a protocol, based on evidence, that is likely to respond to the need; Fourth, test if the protocol works; Fifth, refine, and finally put into practice making any necessary changes.
p>The purpose of this article is to examine conflict between the rights of victims of crimes and the rights of defendants under the German and Polish justice system in the context of the case-law of European courts. The analysis covers two possible occurrences of this conflict: 1) in the cognitive sphere, including proving the defendant’s guilt or innocence, and 2) in the decision-making sphere, including initiation of a criminal applying preventive measures, and sentencing. The main thesis of the article is that in the Polish and German criminal process granting the injured parties not only protective rights, but also the status of an active trial party, the risk of this conflict in both of the above-mentioned spheres of the criminal trial is greater than, e.g., in the Anglo-Saxon process where the victim of the crime acts only as a witness. However, the research cited in the article indicates that the extensive codex procedural rights of injured parties as procedural parties (law in books) are not accompanied by their effective use in procedural practice (law in action). Therefore, the protective rights of alleged vulnerable victims, particularly victims of sexual offences, pose a greater threat to the rights of a defendant which constitute the principle of fair trial in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Considerations of this article confirm also the thesis that procedural rights of defendants still have priority over victims’ rights, which of course results from the inclusion of the former in the human rights catalog contained in the European Convention on Human Rights.</p
Making an Impact on Policing and Crime: Psychological Research, Policy and Practice applies a range of case studies and examples of psychological research by international, leading researchers to tackle real-world issues within the field of crime and policing.
Making an Impact on Policing and Crime documents the application of cutting-edge research to real-world policing and explains how psychologists’ insights have been adapted and developed to offer effective solutions across the criminal justice system. The experts featured in this collection cover a range of psychological topics surrounding the field, including the prevention and reduction of sexual offending and reoffending, the use of CCTV and ‘super-recognisers’, forensic questioning of vulnerable witnesses, the accuracy of nonverbal and verbal lie detection interview techniques, psychological ‘drivers’ of political violence, theoretical models of police–community relations, and the social and political significance of urban ‘riots’.
This collection is a vital resource for practitioners in policing fields and the court system and professionals working with offenders, as well as students and researchers in related disciplines.
In this piece, we reflect on the significance of accessing court records for feminist endeavours. We discuss two examples that illustrate the value of accessing and critiquing court processes. Feminist judgment writing, as a feminist endeavour, demonstrates the significance of hearing women’s stories as well as the importance of nuanced factual analysis that takes account of the lived experiences of women. Access to the court file in one of the rewritten judgments exposed missing relevant facts in the appellate decision, and demonstrates how the appellant’s story was never fully reflected in the judgment or verdict. In our rape trial research, access to court records makes visible the complainant’s evidence and the response of the judge to her as a person. It also allows inquiry as to how the rules of evidence enacted for the protection of the complainant, such as non-disclosure of their occupation, are actually working in practice. En este artículo, reflexionamos sobre el significado de acceder a archivos judiciales para objetivos feministas. Comentamos dos ejemplos que ilustran el valor de acceder a esos archivos y de criticar procesos judiciales. La redacción feminista de decisiones judiciales demuestra la importancia de escuchar los relatos de las mujeres, así como del análisis matizado de hechos que toma en consideración el relato de la experiencia vivida por las mujeres. En uno de los fallos reescritos, el acceso al archivo judicial puso de manifiesto hechos relevantes ausentes en la decisión en apelación, y cómo el relato de la recurrente nunca llegó a reflejarse del todo en la sentencia. En nuestra investigación sobre juicios por violación, el acceso a los archivos hace visibles las pruebas de la denunciante y la respuesta que, como persona, le dio el juez. También permite cuestionar cómo se lleva a la práctica el reglamento probatorio dictado para proteger a la denunciante, como la no revelación de su profesión.
In 2006, social activist Tarana Burke created #MeToo in order to raise awareness of sexual abuse amongst minority ethnic women, after being unable to say those words to a teenager disclosing sexual assault. Over ten years later in October 2017, a series of allegations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein were suddenly taken seriously and led to revelations about several other high-profile men in entertainment and politics. What followed was an outpouring of women sharing their experiences, from everyday intrusions to rape and childhood sexual abuse, often under the Me Too hashtag. In a rise of conflicted and multiplicitous feelings, women created a sense of collective voice and the news headlines were filled with unprecedented recognition of the prevalence of sexual harassment, assault, and abuse.
So far, I have argued that rape trials hold significant barriers to survivor justice because of difficult practicalities and a cultural scaffolding that reinforces the use of rape myths, sexual history evidence, and wider societal stereotypes to undermine survivors’ voices. This chapter will expand on the evidence of deep-rooted barriers to survivor consideration, first by outlining the use of manipulative cross-examination techniques and then by unpacking the competing justice interests discussed by judges and barristers. Rhetoric about ‘rebalancing the system’ has emerged in the last decade, with increasing recognition that victims of crime are voters who can be won over with promises of improved rights in the criminal justice system (Duggan & Heap, 2013). Despite this, vehement opposition from legal professionals occurs each time an increase in survivors’ rights is suggested (for example, Naseem Bajwa & Niculiu’s 2016, response to the idea of sexual history evidence reform). Until now, little has been known about how these competing considerations are actually discussed at trial. Court observations shed light on this, demonstrating that many legal professionals are sensitive to survivors’ well-being, but a blinkered interpretation of the right to a fair trial can limit the extent to which this sensitivity is acted upon. This arrives at the heart of the difficulty with rape trials in England and Wales: In order to protect the accused’s right to a fair trial, it is assumed that survivors must suffer. While cross-examination is mostly restricted to adversarial jurisdictions, the other tensions are present internationally because the same right to fair trial is balanced against the same needs of survivors. Without a significant reframing of the rights of the accused and other witnesses, then, the criminal justice system will remain a hostile place for survivors of rape. Ultimately, this means that criminal justice cannot be the sole arena for survivor justice, as survivors’ needs will never be the central priority.
Chapter 3 outlined the use of rape myths to undermine the survivor’s credibility. This chapter will unpack another common way in which evidence was challenged: sexual history. Sexual history evidence has been restricted since the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, but the retrial of Ched Evans in October 2016 highlighted its ongoing use in court and significantly widened the type of evidence that could be adduced. Despite being initially convicted of rape in April 2013, Evans was acquitted at retrial following claims that the complainant had previously used similar sexual phrases and positions to those described by Evans. News coverage of the retrial criticised this, with Harriet Harman, MP, calling for an amendment to the Prisons and Courts Bill which would tighten restrictions on sexual history evidence. Both this, and a similar call to amend the Sexual Offences Bill, were put on hold after Theresa May called a general election in May 2017, but the proposed amendments are due to be discussed again under a new title of Courts Bill soon. It is unclear exactly when this will happen, but this chapter can inform such policy debates by showing that current restrictions are ineffective. There is no up-to-date academic evidence on the use of sexual history in English and Welsh trials, so this chapter provides essential data from which to have an empirical basis for discussion. Once again, I argue that the criminal justice system is deeply flawed in its ability to provide justice for survivors, this time because safeguards against sexual history evidence are easily undermined using legal discourses about fair trial and consent. While these observations relate to English and Welsh trials, such discourses are relevant to other countries which similarly seek to limit the use of sexual history in court.
Court responses to rape have predominantly been discussed in relation to pervasive stereotypes that trivialise or ‘justify’ rape and undermine survivors (Ellison & Munro, 2013; Temkin & Krahé, 2008); the use of evidence about survivors’ sexual history (Kelly, Temkin, & Griffiths, 2006); and high levels of attrition (Westmarland, 2015). Relatively little has been discussed about the practicalities of trial and their potential role in survivor justice. However, practical considerations are central to the meaningful participation that survivors say they want, and so it is important to examine the seemingly mundane aspects of court. Indeed, S. Payne (2009) has argued that survivors are very anxious before and during their court attendance, especially when there are delays. This may partly explain why ‘fear of going to court’ is the most common reason for survivors withdrawing support for the prosecution, a key aspect of attrition (Lovett, Uzelac, Horvath, & Kelly, 2007). Rather than being extraneous, the practicalities of trial therefore require attention and will be given such in this chapter.
The previous two chapters have begun to demonstrate how rape myths and sexual history evidence dismiss survivors as ‘irrational’ or ‘non-credible’. This chapter now seeks to show how wider gendered narratives are used to justify and reinforce these arguments, adding to the cultural scaffolding outlined in Chap. 3. This is not to say that male survivors are considered credible and rational, only that the narratives observed relate to wider stereotypes about women, and further research is needed into the trial narratives about male survivors. Nor does it mean that women are a homogenous group; the chapter will also unpack the, albeit limited, observation data on intersecting stereotypes about ethnicity, social class, and disability. Despite women having complex and nuanced lives, the trials were remarkably consistent in depicting them as delusional, vindictive, or capricious and childlike, all of which are rooted in a stereotype of women as emotional. In order to understand how such narratives were justified by barristers, it is important to examine the adversarial imperative to win and acknowledge the impact of the burden of proof. In doing so, this chapter reveals the multiple inequalities that are both a symptom and a cause of court responses to rape, providing new empirical insights that can further debates in adversarial jurisdictions.
Questioning in common law accusatorial trials is dominated by the advocates? belief that it is a legitimate opportunity for advocacy rather than just investigation. Examination is a form of story-telling, leading cross-examiners to rely heavily on rhetorical and suggestive questions that advance the preferred narrative. Empirical research suggests that this style of questioning reduces witness accuracy, reduces public confidence in the trial and deters witnesses from coming forward. However, the English courts? new initiative to change practice by shifting advocates? beliefs about the aims of cross-examination shows promise.
The complainants’ memory of the rape is commonly the key and frequently the only evidence in the investigation and prosecution of rape allegations. Details, specificity and consistency in the victim’s recollection are central criteria that criminal justice agents – police, prosecutors and juries – use to assess the credibility of the victim account. However, memory research has shown these to be poor indicators of the accuracy of a memory. In this article we develop a conceptual model of the pathways through which normal features of the human memory result in complaints of rape dropping out of criminal justice process without a full investigation, prosecution or conviction, with a particular focus on the role of inconsistencies in the victim account. We provide initial, tentative evidence from a large, representative sample of rape complaints and discuss implications for criminal justice policy.
Because most cases of alleged sexual assault involve few sources of evidence, the complainant’s testimony is crucial. In line with empirical research findings, the way in which police question sexual assault complainants has evolved to ultimately maximise both the completeness and accuracy of evidence. But has courtroom questioning changed over time? To answer this question, we compared the courtroom questioning of sexual assault complainants in the 1950s to that used in cases from the turn of the twenty-first century. Overall, lawyers in contemporary cases asked complainants more questions and uttered more words than they did historically. Complainants, too, appear to have become more vocal over time. Across the two time periods, the questioning style used by prosecuting lawyers has shifted towards a more open style. In stark contrast, the format of cross-examination questions has remained remarkably consistent over time, with leading questions still making up the bulk of the questions asked. These findings have important implications for future legal reform and legal practice.
Suspected sex offences are difficult to investigate and prosecute. In many instances the only evidence that exists is an account from a complainant and one from a suspect. This means that the way that these accounts are elicited with an investigative interview are critical. In this chapter we will outline what we know about effective strategies for interviewing both complainants and suspects. Effective interviewing of complainants can dramatically increase the volume of information a complainant provides and has the potential to increase the credibility of this evidence. This is especially relevant now that recorded police interviews can be provided as evidence-in-chief in some jurisdictions. Suspect interviewing can be enhanced by using non-judgmental approaches, allowing to the suspect to give his own account, and by other methods. We will draw together complainant and suspect interviewing to show how effective investigative interviewing can enhance the investigation and prosecution of sex crimes.
This research review was commissioned as part of the Stern Review of responses by public bodies to rape.The terms of reference included a series of 31 questions about the extent to which there was research evidence on key policy issues, including evidence of the effectiveness of recent legislative and practice changes in England and Wales.The time scale precluded a full systematic literature review and so an adapted Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) methodology was utilised following the guidance provided in the Government Social Research Unit’s REA toolkit.As is frequently the case, the research and policy agendas do not readily map onto one another in clear and consistent ways so it was not possible to fully address all the questions posed.
This document summarises a much longer report structured in terms of the specific questions the review was asked to address and assessing the strength of evidence currently available. Here the findings are presented through a set of key themes:
• what we know about the prevalence and distribution of rape;
• reporting and disclosure;
• support and advocacy;
• the response of the criminal justice system;
• the response of the health system;
• attitudes to and stereotypes of rape; and
• the impact of recent policy changes.
We conclude with some possible future directions which flow from this evidence base.The findings are located within a summary of the current policy context and the methodological approach used to access the
material used.
Examines practical steps that can be taken to increase expertise in giving evidence. The purpose of the court process is discussed, and the implications that this has for the expert witness are considered. The nature of expert testimony is described, and the presentation of evidence to the court in report form is outlined. Tactics adopted during cross-examination to unsettle the expert witness and methods for countering these tactics are presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Conducted 2 experiments in which Ss viewed a film of an automobile accident and then answered questions about events occurring in the film. 100 graduate students were Ss in Exp I, and 60 14-20 yr old Ss recruited in a library served in Exp II. Relative to questions containing an indefinite article (e.g., Did you see a broken headlight?), questions which contained a definite article (e.g., Did you see the broken headlight?) produced (a) fewer uncertain or "I don't know" responses; and (b) more "recognition" of events that never, in fact, occurred. Results, which are consistent with the view that questions asked subsequent to an event can cause a reconstruction in one's memory of that event, have important implications for courtroom practices and eyewitness investigations. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
What organizational and community conditions influence legal officials to treat rape victims “unresponsively”? Our analysis is guided by Goffman's theory of organizational frameworks and frames of activity and March and Olsen's institutional theory of organizations. Using data from 130 m-organizations in Florida that process rape cases, we compare six types of organizations (including hospital emergency rooms and rape crisis centers) on eight criteria and review their frameworks and frames of activity relative to unresponsiveness. We use the issue of victim legitimacy to illustrate the utility of our model. Our results show that well-meaning staff in legal organizations are oriented to routinely treat victims unresponsively. Their organizations routinely orient them to be concerned with, for example, public approval, the avoidance of losing, and expediency more than with victims' needs. In our conclusion, we identify ways legal officials and rape crisis centers can promote responsive treatment of victims. We also call for research on legal organizations that are responsive to victims and for a nationwide discourse on the “politics of rape victims' needs” as a means of addressing the gender inequality issues that underlie rape crimes and laws and orient legal officials to treat victims unresponsively .
A mock-jury study was conducted to examine juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Subjects were 129 eligible and experienced jurors from Dane County, Wisconsin, who viewed a videotaped trial that involved an eyewitness identification. Ten factors associated with the crime and the identification (e.g., disguise of the perpetrator, retention interval, confidence of the witness) were manipulated. The results of this mock-jury study were combined with those of a previous study using the same experimental stimuli and procedures, but using undergraduates as subjects. This analysis showed that the confidence of the eyewitness was the most powerful predictor of verdicts (p<.05) and that differences between undergraduates and eligible jurors in their sensitivity to eyewitness evidence were negligible.
The purposes of this study were to assess (a) the extent of attrition in the processing of sexual assault cases in the legal systems, (b) factors associated with attrition at various stages in the process, and (c) victims' experiences in the legal system and the relations between these experiences and recovery. Our results suggest that substantial attrition continues to occur in the prosecution of rape cases, that more severe assaults are prosecuted more vigorously, that victims are generally satisfied with the police (but not with the legal system in general), and that neither attitudes nor case outcomes are associated with victims' postrape recovery. Research and policy implications are discussed.
Emotion reduces utilization of cues. In some tasks this can be an advantage (elimination of irrelevant cues); more often, however, such reduction inhibits performance. Attentive behavior fits into the framework of this theory. It can also be easily translated into terms of information theory allowing a qualitative evaluation of task difficulty.
Examines practical steps that can be taken to increase expertise in giving evidence. The purpose of the court process is discussed, and the implications that this has for the expert witness are considered. The nature of expert testimony is described, and the presentation of evidence to the court in report form is outlined. Tactics adopted during cross-examination to unsettle the expert witness and methods for countering these tactics are presented.
This volume, a sequel to The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions and Testimony which is widely acclaimed by both scientists and practitioners, brings the field completely up-to-date and focuses in particular on aspects of vulnerability, confabulation and false confessions. The is an unrivalled integration of scientific knowledge of the psychological processes and research relating to interrogation, with the practical investigative and legal issues that bear upon obtaining, and using in court, evidence from interrogations of suspects. Accessible style which will appeal to academics, students and practitioners. Authoritative integration of theory, research, practical implications and vivid case illustration. Coverage of topical issues like confabulation, false memory, and false confessions. Part of the Wiley Series in The Psychology of Crime, Policing and Law.
How should feminists concerned about women's experiences with rape prosecution position themselves relative to victims' rights legislation? This interview-based study focuses on rape survivors' talk about their participation in the criminal justice process and their emotional investments in prosecution. The authors examine how they account for their participation in sentencing - in particular, how they justify having pursued particular kinds of involvements or not. The authors identify four motivations to write to the court and to attend or speak at sentencing. Then, the authors explain how rape survivors' prior involvement in court events, their emotional states, and the support they receive from others leads them to selectively engage in sentencing activities.
How should feminists concerned about women's experiences with rape prosecution position themselves relative to victims' rights legislation? This interview-based study focuses on rape survivors' talk about their participation in the criminal justice process and their emotional investments in prosecution. The authors examine how they account for their participation in sentencing—in particular, how they justify having pursued particular kinds of involvements or not. The authors identify four motivations to write to the court and to attend or speak at sentencing. Then, the authors explain how rape survivors' prior involvement in court events, their emotional states, and the support they receive from others leads them to selectively engage in sentencing activities.
This article is about how rape survivors prepare themselves for courtroom appearances. Through it, the author attempts to take research on rape processing beyond a focus on the affective responses of rape “victims” have to the behavior of legal personnel and toward an investigation of the agency of rape survivors. The study builds on law and society research about lay litigants' efforts to use the U.S. civil court system, linguistic research about witnesses involvement in courtroom interaction, and the existing literature on rape processing. It is based on face-to-face interviews with 32 survivors and 12 courtroom observations. The analysis is inductive; the presentation is ethnographic. The author explicates six types of preparation for court: appearance work, role rehearsal, emotion work, team building, role research, and case enhancement. The author discusses how survivors' perceptions of what the criminal justice process entails are reflected in the different preparation activities, and the author offers policy implications regarding the treatment of rape survivors in the criminal justice system.
This paper is a post-hoc examination of the questioning used in six rape trials. Questions asked in the evidence-in-chief and cross-examination of six complainants and five defendants were coded into different categories. The categories comprised "open", "closed", "leading", "heavily-leading" and "yes/no" questions; questions that are known to increasingly constrain witness responses. Additionally, the frequency of "multiple questions", and questions with "negatives" and "double negatives" were recorded; questions that witnesses have difficulty understanding. Broadly speaking, results showed that questions in both evidence-in-chief and cross-examination were of a constraining nature and allowed witnesses little opportunity to provide complete accounts of alleged events, particularly during cross-examination. Multiple questions were frequent although negatives were comparatively rare, and double negatives did not occur. Similar forms of questioning were used for complainants as for defendants, although more questions were asked of complainants than defendants in cross-examination. The results are discussed in terms of the adverse influence of these questioning strategies on the completeness and accuracy of witnesses' responses, and the similarity in "combativeness" of lawyers in their examination of complainants and defendants.
Discusses the major ways that social workers can maximize their credibility in court appearances to present evidence about cases on which they have worked, or to present expert testimony. These ways include effective testifying in the courtroom (especially dealing with cross-examination, objections, and leading questions) and presenting relevant material as evidence (and distinguishing valid evidence from hearsay). Also discussed are such questions as "what constitutes an admission," the "best evidence rule," and "the opinion rule." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This volume provides a practical guide to interrogation, its effects and implications, based on scientific findings. The main theme is the 'how and why' of false confessions—which are shown to be more frequent than is generally believed. . . . This is the first book to raise the important issues of false confession from a scientific perspective, backed up by references to well-known contemporary cases (including the 'Guildford Four,' 'Birmingham Six' and 'Tottenham Three') in which the author has been involved.
This unique book considers, in depth, police interrogation methods and the processes by which confessions are elicited. Concerned with both theory and practice, the basic principles of interrogation are explained in detail, and supplemented by relevant psychological research data. Present practice is described from the author's extensive experience of investigating the reliability of confessions in actual cases.
Aimed primarily at clinical psychologists working in this field, "The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions and Testimony" will also be invaluable reading for police officers, lawyers, judges, social workers, and academics and researchers in the field of psychology and the criminal justice system. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Despite the obvious importance of eyewitness information in criminal investigation, police receive surprisingly little instruction on how to conduct an effective interview with a cooperative eyewitness (Sanders, 1986). . . . Reflecting this lack of formal training, police often maintain a less-than-rigorous attitude toward this phase of investigation. . . . It is not surprising, therefore, that police investigators often make avoidable mistakes when conducting a friendly interview and fail to elicit potentially valuable information. The intent of this book is to provide the police interviewer (INT) or any other investigative INT with a systematic approach so that he can elicit the maximum amount of relevant information from cooperative eyewitnesses (E/Ws).
The language of this book is couched in terms of police investigations, primarily because our research has been conducted with police participants. However, since the Cognitive Interview is based on general principles of cognition, it should be useful to anyone conducting an investigative interview, whether a police detective, fire marshal, state-, defense-, or civil attorney, private investigator, etc.
The Cognitive Interview has evolved over the past several years and reflects a multidisciplinary approach. We have relied heavily on the theoretical, laboratory research in cognitive psychology (hence the name "Cognitive Interview") that we and other psychologists have conducted over the past thirty years. . . . The Cognitive Interview . . . is an eclectic approach, making use of ideas found across a variety of people, research approaches and disciplines. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
When a therapist becomes a courtroom witness, he/she often is in unfamiliar territory. Before appearing as a witness, a therapist must prepare by completely understanding the case and client, together with courtroom practices and procedures. This article reviews trial preparation and illustrates examination and cross-examination, opinion testimony and hypothetical questions. The rules of effective response to cross-examination are set forth to aid the therapist in providing meaningful and credible testimony under adverse and occasionally unpleasant conditions.
Little research has been conducted on the behaviors of prosecuting attor-neys and their interactions with rape survivors between charging and court events. Yet this period, during which prosecutors prepare rape survivors for their witness roles, may be crucial for obtaining successful convictions. Using intensive interviews with 32 rape survivors and background interviews with prosecutors, victim witness advocates, and rape crisis workers, I evaluated the nature of directives and information given to rape survivors and the frequency with which directives were conveyed before preliminary hearings and court events. I concluded that prosecutors employ 20 modes of preparation to construct rape survivors as credible victims for judges and jurors. They orient the rape survivor to the scope of the witness role and her place in the interaction with legal actors, direct her to enhance the credibility of her story, and enhance the credibility of her self'presentation. Research showed that prosecutors prepared respondents more thoroughly for trials than for preliminary hearings, but little overall. A large minority of respondents, consequently, reported dissatisfaction with the preparation they received. On the basis of the findings, I call for an extension of Martin and Powell's “politics of victim's needs,” attention to the importance of maintaining a perception of procedural justice among rape survivors, and further research into pre-court preparation.
Two experiments are reported in which subjects viewed films of automobiled accidents and then answered questions about events occurring in the films. The question, “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” elicited higher estimates of speed than questions which used the verbs collided, bumped, contacted, or hit in place of smashed. On a retest one week later, those subjects who received the verb smashed were more likely to say “yes” to the question, “Did you see any broken glass?”, even though broken glass was not present in the film. These results are consistent with the view that the questions asked subsequent to an event can cause a reconstruction in one's memory of that event.
This paper presents extracts from cross-examinations with child witnesses who are alleged victims of child sexual abuse. The manner in which cross-examination may present a challenge to the child's identity as child, victim and witness is discussed. Specifically, the child may be portrayed as unchildlike, for example in their experience of sexual relationships or in their sexual knowledge. They may be portrayed as less than innocent, through references to previous contacts with social services or to other behaviours such as delinquency. Child witnesses may be depicted as instigators rather than victims, seducing the adult or seeking revenge through sexual allegations. Finally, children are easily accused of being poor witnesses, as being confused, untruthful and having fallible memories. The paper considers the dynamics and potential impact of such cross-examination practice within Finkelhor's framework of four traumagenics of sexual abuse: traumatic sexualization, betrayal, powerlessness and stigmatization. The potential for poorly conducted cross-examinations to create further problems for child witnesses, particularly in the area of identity, is highlighted, and it is suggested traumagenic factors in such cross-examinations may resemble those of abuse. The paper discusses practice implications for cross-examination, judicial intervention and witness support following implementation of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 in England and Wales. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Purpose. To identify the ways in which witnesses with and without intellectual disabilities are examined in court. Specifically to identify what questions are asked and what influence they have.
Methods. Court transcripts were obtained for 16 rape, sexual assault or assault trials involving witnesses with intellectual disabilities and 16 matched cases involving witnesses from the general population. The cases were assessed systematically concerning the questioning strategies of lawyers and the influence of those strategies on witness responses.
Results. Questioning of witnesses with intellectual disabilities was almost identical to that of witnesses from the general population indicating that lawyers are not altering their questioning behaviour for witnesses with intellectual disabilities, either positively or negatively. Cross‐examination is particularly poor for eliciting accurate memory reports, especially for witnesses with intellectual disabilities. The accounts of witnesses with intellectual disabilities are shorter and more likely to agree with a leading question than are accounts from the general population.
Conclusion. The way in which witnesses are examined does little to ensure that their memories are as accurate as possible. People with intellectual disabilities should be questioned in such a way that their ability to give accurate evidence in court is maximized.
A question of evidence? Investigating and prosecuting rape in the 1990s
- J Harris
- S Grace
Harris, J., & Grace, S. (1999). A question of evidence? Investigating and prosecuting rape in the 1990s. Home Office Research Study 196, London: Home Office. Home Office. (1999). Action for justice: Implementing the Speaking Up for Justice Report on Vulnerable or intimidated witnesses in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. London: Home Office.
Under fire: Lawyers questioning children in criminal courts
- V K Kranat
- H L Westcott
Kranat, V.K., & Westcott, H.L. (1994). Under fire: Lawyers questioning children in criminal courts. Expert Evidence, 3, 16–24.
Developing witness skills
- D Carson
Advocacy in court: A beginner's guide
- K Evans
The second rape: Society's continued betrayal of the victim
- L Madigan
- N Gambel
An evaluation of the live link for child witnesses. London: Home Office
- G M Davies
- E Noon
Evidence and advocacy
- P Murphy
- D Barnard
Cross-examination in criminal trials
- M Stone
Action for justice: Implementing the Speaking Up for Justice Report on Vulnerable or intimidated witnesses in the criminal justice system in England and Wales
- Home Office