Vulnerable witnesses: Interviewing children - Extra reading

Question 1

Introduction of videotaped evidence

Name and date

Answer 1

• Reduced stress levels for children
• Did not increase conviction rates
• Evidence is fresh, untarnished by subsequent interviews and not deteriorated over time
• Repeated poor interviews = falsifying child’s account
• Videotape interviewers more supportive and accommodating to child
• Opened court access to more children (some wouldn’t cope with live testimony)

Wilson and Davies 1999

Question 2

What was said about children being witnesses?

Name and date

Answer 2

• Highly suggestible
• Cannot distinguish fantasy from real life
• Malleable memories (can be moulded)

Goodman 1984

Question 3

Evaluation of special measures

Name and date

Answer 3

• Removal of wigs/gowns and intermediary may reduce stress
• Understanding of special measures and how they do not favour the witness needs to be improved
• Focus on poor communication by adults rather than the child themselves

Aldridge and Williams 2006

Question 4

Issues arising from video evidence in chief

Name and date

Answer 4

• Quality of questions in interviews (misleading)
• Jurors engagement with the witness (no connection)
• Sense of formality (reduces child’s credibility)
• Clarity of evidence (poor recording, not substantial enough)
• Child’s preparedness for cross-examination

Burrows and Powell 2014