Asked and Answered: Questioning Children in the Courtroom

Zajac, Rachel; Gross, Julien; Hayne, Harlene

doi:10.1375/pplt.2003.10.1.199

Cited by 117 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers have shown that when exposed to misinformation about a prior experience, children will report that misinformation, even during free recall, which is understood to be best interviewing practice in forensic interviews (Sutherland & Hayne, 2001;Zajac & Hayne, 2003). For example, in Sutherland and Hayne (2001), 11-to 12-yearold children and adults watched a short video clip either individually (immediate-retention condition) or in groups of 2 to 4 (delayed-retention condition).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The goal of cross-examination is to discredit the witness; the opposing lawyer often accuses the witness of being dishonest, and uses leading and suggestive and complex questions. Child witnesses have expressed the view that crossexamination is the most distressing and frightening part of the trial (Eastwood & Patton, 2002) and research has shown that cross-examination does not necessary uncover the truth in children's testimony (Zajac et al, 2003;Zajac & Cannan, 2009;Zajac, Gross, & Hayne, 2003). Despite this, we know that cross-examination does influence juror decision-making.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: the Effect of Truncated Testimony on Juror Decision‐making

Anderson

Gross

Sonne

et al. 2016

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many countries around the world have modified their legislation to allow child complainants of abuse to present their evidence-in-chief via pre-recorded videotape, or through closedcircuit-television (CCTV), rather than through live testimony, which has been shown to be stressful for children. With this modification, many countries also allow for childrens' videotaped evidence to be truncated for relevance or admissibility purposes. In the two experiments, we examined whether truncating testimony influenced how mock jurors rated the credibility of a 6-year-old child complainant when her testimony contained the primary core allegation only, or when the testimony was presented with either one or two additionalbut less plausible-allegations. We also examined how mock jurors rated the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Contrary to what we predicted, we found that participants believed the child's core allegation, regardless of whether or not it was presented with additional less plausible allegations. Moreover, jurors who read the transcripts containing multiple allegations of abuse were more likely to find the defendant guilty of the core allegation than were jurors who read the core allegation only. These findings suggest that the truncation of testimony may affect the outcome of a trial; however, more research is needed on the effects of truncated testimony on juror decision-making as we continue to try to make the criminal justice system as fair as possible for all of those involved.iii

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: the Effect of Truncated Testimony on Juror Decision‐making

Anderson

Gross

Sonne

et al. 2016

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…19,25 In addition, because of their willingness to be responsive to adults, children are more likely to answer complex, ambiguous questions than adults. 26 This tendency can be exploited by attorneys interested in diminishing the credibility of a child's testimony.…”

Section: Competencementioning

confidence: 99%

The Child Witness in the Courtroom

Pantell

2017

Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beginning in the 1980s, children have increasingly served as witnesses in the criminal, civil, and family courts; currently, >100 000 children appear in court each year. This statement updates the 1992 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy statement “The Child as a Witness” and the subsequent 1999 “The Child in Court: A Subject Review.” It also builds on existing AAP policy on adverse life events affecting children and resources developed to understand and address childhood trauma. The purpose of this policy statement is to provide background information on some of the legal issues involving children testifying in court, including the accuracy and psychological impact of child testimony; to provide suggestions for how pediatricians can support patients who will testify in court; and to make recommendations for policy improvements to minimize the adverse psychological consequences for child witnesses. These recommendations are, for the most part, based on studies on the psychological and physiologic consequences of children witnessing and experiencing violence, as well as appearing in court, that have emerged since the previous AAP publications on the subject. The goal is to reduce the secondary traumatization of and long-term consequences for children providing testimony about violence they have experienced or witnessed. This statement primarily addresses children appearing in court as victims of physical or sexual abuse or as witnesses of violent acts; most of the scientific literature addresses these specific situations. It may apply, in certain situations, to children required to provide testimony in custody disputes, child welfare proceedings, or immigration court. It does not address children appearing in court as offenders or as part of juvenile justice proceedings.

show abstract

“…Las estrategias utilizadas van desde el uso de preguntas complejas, múltiples, negativas, subordinadas y/o con cláusulas finales interrogativas también llamadas preguntas coletilla (Greenstock & Pipe, 1996;Saywitz & Nathanson, 1993) hasta preguntas sugestivas (Bruck, Ceci, & Hembrooke, 2002;Zajac, Gross, & Hayne, 2003) o entrevistas dirigidas (Lamb et al, 1996). La excelente revisión realizada por Sas (2002) para el Departamento de Justicia de Canadá recoge los aspectos principales que afectan a la capacidad del menor para testificar en tribunal.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Jueces hablando con niños: terminología legal utilizada en la toma de declaración de menores

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumen: El propósito de este trabajo fue analizar el lenguaje legal utilizado por los magistrados en la toma de declaración a menores en tribunal. A pesar de la existencia de normativas nacionales e internacionales acerca de la necesidad de adaptar el lenguaje a la edad y el nivel de desarrollo de los niños y niñas que declaran en tribunal, existen pocos estudios que tengan por objetivo confirmar si esa adaptación es real. El análisis de la toma de declaración a 33 menores entre los 8 y los 18 años reveló que los magistrados utilizan un lenguaje legal complejo cuando se dirigen al menor, identificándose 48 términos técnicos. Algunos de ellos son semejantes a los encontrados en otros estudios realizados en países con modelos de justicia diferentes y en lengua inglesa (tribunal, testimonio o testigo), pero otros representan conceptos muy específicos y de difícil comprensión para un menor (suspensión provisional del proceso o secreto del sumario). La presencia de terminología legal en el discurso y las preguntas que los magistrados dirigen a los menores varía considerablemente entre ellos. El propio contexto discursivo en el que surgen los términos técnicos identificados es complejo. Abstract:The purpose of this study was to analyze the legal language used by judges when taking statements from children at court. Despite the existence of national and international regulations on the need to adapt the language to children's age and level of development, there are few studies that aim to confirm whether this adaptation is real. The analysis of 33 statement takings from children between 8 and 18 years old revealed that judges use a complex legal language when speaking to a child. Forty-eight legal terms were identified. Some of them are similar to those found in other studies carried out in Englishspeaking countries and with different models of justice (court, testimony or witness). Other terms represent very specific concepts that are difficult to understand for a minor, like provisional suspension of the procedure or confidentiality of judicial inquiries. The presence of legal terminology in the discourse and inquiries that judges use with minors varies considerably among them. The discursive context where these legal terms appear is also complex.Palabras clave: terminología legal, jueces, menores, toma de declaración, tribunal.

show abstract

Asked and Answered: Questioning Children in the Courtroom

Cited by 117 publications

References 19 publications

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: the Effect of Truncated Testimony on Juror Decision‐making

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: the Effect of Truncated Testimony on Juror Decision‐making

The Child Witness in the Courtroom

Jueces hablando con niños: terminología legal utilizada en la toma de declaración de menores

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About