Child complaints

Question 1

3 reasons Video/DVD recording of child interviews is the best way

Answer 1

• Interview is focused on the child and allows them to state clearly and freely what happened
• Interview can be used for the basis of an investigation
• Avoids the need to re-interview the child for different purposes.

Question 2

How should you Prepare a witness before trial

Answer 2

• Opportunity to view the video record before they testify in court
• The child should meet the Crown Prosecutor before the trial
• Be shown the courtroom
• Be given the booklet

Question 3

To present the complainant’s evidence in chief by an alternative method such as a video/DVD record, Police must…

Answer 3

• Apply to the court under s107 of the Evidence Act 2007, for the evidence to be admitted by this method.
• Applications are normally prepared by the Crown Solicitor.
• Application must be made as early as possible before the trial

Question 4

Transcripts of video/DVD records -Who checks it and when should it be provided to counsel?

Answer 4

• O/C case checks the DVD transcript
• Under reg 28 of the Evidence Regulations 2007, Police must ensure that a typed transcript of a video record to be used in proceedings is given to the defendant or defendant’s lawyer as soon as practicable after the defendant has pleaded not guilty.

Question 5

Assault on a child, or by a male on a female - Legislation

Answer 5

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who—

(a) Assaults any child under the age of 14 years; or
(b) Being a male, assaults any female.

Question 6

Section 59 C A - When do Police have discretion not to prosecute cases of parental control (smacking a child)

Answer 6

Where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.

Question 7

Ill-treatment or neglect of child or vulnerable adult

Answer 7

S195 - 10 Years

(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, being a person described in subsection (2),
- intentionally engages in conduct that, or
- omits to discharge or perform any legal duty (the omission of which, is likely to cause suffering, injury, adverse effects to health, or any mental disorder or disability to a child or vulnerable adult)
- if the conduct engaged in, or the omission to perform the legal duty, is a major departure from the standard of care to be expected of a reasonable person.
(2) The persons are— (a) a person who has actual care or charge of the victim; or (b) a person who is a staff member of any hospital, institution, or residence where the victim resides.
(3) For the purposes of this section and section 195A, a child is a person under the age of 18 years.

Question 8

Failure to protect child or vulnerable adult

Answer 8

S 195A 10 years.

(1) Being a person who has frequent contact with a child or vulnerable adult and
(a) knows that the victim is at risk of death, grievous bodily harm, or sexual assault as the result of—
(i) an unlawful act by another person; or
(ii) an omission by another person to discharge or perform a legal duty if, in the circumstances, that omission is a major departure from the standard of care expected of a reasonable person to whom that legal duty applies; and
(b) fails to take reasonable steps to protect the victim from that risk.

Question 9

Failure to protect child … “person” “knows” and “fails” definitions

Answer 9

Person:

• members of the same household as the victim
• people who are staff members of any hospital, institution or residence where the victim resides.

Criminal liability will arise if such a person has frequent contact with a child (or vulnerable adult) and:

• knows (mens rea) the victim is at risk of death, grievous bodily harm or sexual assault as a result of the acts or omissions of another person; and
• fails (actus reus) to take reasonable steps to protect the victim from that risk

Question 10

What 4 things are required to be proved - Failure to protect child

Answer 10

• The person at risk was under the age of 18 at the time of the offence, and
• that the defendant was over the age of 18, and,
• the defendant was a member of the same household as the victim or a staff member in a hospital or institution or residence where the victim resides had “frequent contact” with them, and
• the defendant had knowledge of the risk of harm to the child