Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T05:31:29.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - The Status of Evidentiary and Procedural Innovations in Child Abuse Proceedings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2009

By
Bradley D. McAuliff  and
Margaret Bull Kovera
Edited by
Bette L. Bottoms ,
Margaret Bull Kovera  and
Bradley D. McAuliff
Bradley D. McAuliff
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Research Associate University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Margaret Bull Kovera
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Psychology Florida International University
Bette L. Bottoms
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Chicago
Margaret Bull Kovera
Affiliation:
Florida International University
Bradley D. McAuliff
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Get access

Summary

Prosecuting physical and sexual crimes allegedly perpetrated against children is a complex and difficult task. Often the sole eyewitness to the crime is the abused child. As a result, the successful prosecution of many child abuse cases hinges on the child victim's account of the crime. Testifying in court can be stressful for any witness, particularly for child victims of physical or sexual abuse (Goodman et al., 1992). Several features of traditional trial proceedings, such as facing the accused or describing the details of the alleged crime in open court, may make children reluctant to testify about their abuse (Sas, 1991) and may decrease the accuracy of their testimony (Saywitz & Nathanson, 1993).

Various evidentiary and procedural innovations have been introduced over the past decade to help enable victims to testify in child abuse proceedings. At the federal level, for example, the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 (§3266) amended the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, extending special accommodations to children such as allowing the presence of a support person during the child's testimony and closing the courtroom to the public (Whitcomb, 1992). Many states have enacted statutes permitting the use of innovative procedures, such as videotaped or closed-circuit television (CCTV) testimony, in trials involving alleged child abuse victims. Those innovations are examples of a broad spectrum of alternatives to traditional testimony that were designed to reduce the stress associated with appearing in court and to increase the accuracy of children's testimony.

Type
Chapter
Information
Children, Social Science, and the Law , pp. 412 - 446
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aldridge, J., & Freshwater, K. (1993). The preparation of child witnesses. Journal of Child Law, 5, 25–27Google Scholar
Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out?Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., & Francoeur, E. (1999). The accuracy of mothers' memories of conversations with their preschool children. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 89–106Google Scholar
Burgoon, J. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12, 30–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55, 58–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., & LePoire, B. A. (1993). Effects of communication expectancies, actual communication, and expectancy disconfirmation on evaluations of communicators and their communication behavior. Human Communication Research, 20, 67–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., & Walther, J. B. (1990). Nonverbal expectancies and the evaluative consequences of violations. Human Communication Research, 17, 232–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashmore, J. (1992). The use of closed-circuit television for child witnesses in the ACT. Sydney, New South Wales: Australian Law Reform Commission
Davies, G., & Noon, E. (1991). An evaluation of the live link for child witnesses. London: Home Office
Feldman, R. S., & Chesley, R. B. (1984). Who is lying, who is not: An attributional analysis of the effects of nonverbal behavior on judgments of defendant believability. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 2, 451–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golding, J. M., Alexander, M. C., & Stewart, T. L. (1999). The effect of hearsay witness age in a child sexual assault trial. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 420–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golding, J. M., Sanchez, R. P., & Sego, S. A. (1997). The believability of hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 299–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, G. S., Quas, J. A., Bulkley, J., & Shapiro, C. (1999). Innovations for child witnesses: A national survey. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 255–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, G. S., Taub, E. P., Jones, D. P. H., England, P., Port, L. K., Rudy, L., & Prado, L. (1992). Testifying in criminal court: Emotional effects on child sexual assault victims. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57 (Serial No. 229)CrossRef
Goodman, G. S., Tobey, A. E., Batterman-Faunce, J. M., Orcutt, H., Thomas, S., Shapiro, C., & Sachsenmaier, T. (1998). Face-to-face confrontation: Effects of closed-circuit technology on children's eyewitness testimony and jurors' decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 165–203CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hafemeister, T. L. (1996). Protecting child witnesses: Judicial efforts to minimize trauma and reduce evidentiary barriers. Violence and Victims, 11, 71–92Google ScholarPubMed
Hemsley, G., & Doob, A. (1978). The effect of looking behavior on perceptions of a communicator's credibility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8, 136–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, K. S., Amacher, E., & Kastanakis, J. A. (1992). The court prep group: A vital part of the court process. In H. Dent & R. Flin (Eds.), Children as witnesses (pp. 201–209). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley
Kovera, M. B., Gresham, A. W., Borgida, E., Gray, E., & Regan, P. C. (1997). Does expert testimony inform or influence juror decision-making? A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 178–191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Sternberg, K. J., Hershkowitz, I., & Horowitz, D. (2000). Accuracy of investigators' verbatim notes of their interviews with alleged child abuse victims. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 699–708CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindsay, R. C. L., Ross, D. F., Lea, J. A., & Carr, C. (1995). What's fair when a child testifies?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 870–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipovsky, J., & Stern, P. (1997). Preparing children for court: An interdisciplinary view. Child Maltreatment, 2, 150–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990)
McGough, L. S. (1994). Child witnesses: Fragile voices in the American legal system. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
Melton, G. B., Limber, S. P., Jacobs, J. E., & Oberlander, L. B. (1992). Preparing sexually abused children for testimony: Children's perceptions of the legal process (Final Report to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, Grant No. 90-CA-1274). Lincoln: University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Murray, K. (1995). Live television link: An evaluation of its use by child witnesses in Scottish criminal trials. Edinburgh: Scottish Office, Central Research Unit
Myers, J. E. B. (1992). Legal issues in child abuse and neglect. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Myers, J. E. B., Redlich, A. D., Goodman, G. S., Prizmich, L. P., & Imwinkelried, E. (1999). Jurors' perceptions of hearsay in child sexual abuse cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 388–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, W. W., & Nunez, N. (1999). Complex language and comprehension monitoring: Teaching child witnesses to recognize linguistic confusion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 661–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quas, J. A., DeCicco, V., Bulkley, J., & Goodman, G. S. (1996). District attorneys' views of legal innovations for child witnesses. American Psychology-Law Society Newsletter, 16, 5–8Google Scholar
Redlich, A. D., Myers, J. E. B., Goodman, G. S., & Qin, J. (1999). A comparison of two forms of hearsay in child sexual abuse cases. Manuscript submitted for publication
Ross, D. F., Hopkins, S., Hanson, E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hazen, K., & Eslinger, T. (1994). The impact of protective shields and videotape testimony on conviction rates in a simulated trial of child sexual abuse. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 553–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D. F., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Marsil, D. F. (1999). The impact of hearsay testimony on conviction rates in trials of child sexual abuse: Toward balancing the rights of defendants and child witnesses. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 439–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salekin, R. T., Ogloff, J. R. P., McFarland, C., & Rogers, R. (1995). Influencing jurors' perceptions of guilt: Expression of emotionality during testimony. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sas, L. D. (1991). Reducing the system-induced trauma for child sexual abuse victims through court preparation, assessment and follow-up (Final Report, Project No. 4555-1-125, National Welfare Grants Division, Health and Welfare Canada). London, Ontario: London Family Court Clinic
Sas, L. D. (1992). Empowering child witnesses for sexual abuse prosecution. In H. Dent & R. Flin (Eds.), Children as witnesses (pp. 181–199). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley
Saywitz, K. J., & Nathanson, R. (1993). Children's testimony and their perceptions of stress in and out of the courtroom. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17, 613–622CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saywitz, K. J., & Snyder, L. (1993). Improving children's testimony with preparation. In G. S. Goodman & B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony (pp. 117–146). New York: Guilford Press
Saywitz, K. J., & Snyder, L. (1996). Narrative elaboration: Test of a new procedure for interviewing children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1347–1357CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saywitz, K. J., Snyder, L., & Lamphear, V. (1996). Helping children tell what happened: A follow-up study of the narrative elaboration procedure. Child Maltreatment, 1, 200–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saywitz, K. J., Snyder, L., & Nathanson, R. (1999). Facilitating the communicative competence of the child witness. Applied Developmental Science, 3, 58–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schacter, D. L. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 54, 182–203CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, C. W., & Brigham, J. C. (1996). Jurors' perceptions of child victim-witnesses in a simulated sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 581–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigler, R. T., Crowley, J. M., & Johnson, I. (1990). Judicial and prosecutorial endorsement of innovative techniques in the trial of domestic abuse cases. Journal of Criminal Justice, 18, 443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swim, J. K., Borgida, E., & McCoy, K. (1993). Videotaped versus in-court witness testimony: Does protecting the child witness jeopardize due process?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 603–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tobey, A. E., Goodman, G. S., Batterman-Faunce, J. M., Orcutt, H. K., & Sachsenmaier, T. (1995). Balancing the rights of children and defendants: Effects of closed-circuit television on children's accuracy and jurors' perceptions. In M. S. Zaragoza, J. R. Graham, G. C. N. Hall, R. Hirschman, & Y. S. Ben-Porath (Eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 214–239). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Child Abuse and Neglect State Statute Series, 4. Washington DC: National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information
Warren, A. R., & Woodall, C. E. (1999). The reliability of hearsay testimony: How well do interviewers recall their interviews with children?Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 355–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitcomb, D. (1992). When the victim is a child (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×