Registered intermediaries’ assessment of children’s communication: An exploration of aims and processes

Abstract

Following the implementation of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 for England and Wales, Registered Intermediaries have been available to assist child witness communication in legal proceedings since 2004. Registered Intermediaries are given training to fulfil this role. However, their assessments and practices are conducted independently. This study examined Registered Intermediaries’ perceptions and experiences of this independent practice, and the impact this had on the quality of the legal process in terms of evidential quality, child witness experiences and engagement. Seventeen experienced and currently active Registered Intermediaries with a range of communication specialisms took part in semi-structured interviews, which were analysed thematically. Six main themes emerged from the data: assessment constraints and requirements, essential elements of the assessment process, why the assessment process is effective, ensuring recommendations are followed through, pressures and barriers, and practice development. The Registered Intermediaries stressed the need for further training for themselves as well as for legal professionals, and emphasised the benefits of working as a team throughout the assessment and legal process.

Intermediaries in Chile: Facilitating the right of child victims and witnesses to participate and be heard in criminal trials

“…Given its novelty and the lack of a standardised international intermediary scheme, empirical research on the performance of intermediaries and on the outcomes of their functions has been limited internationally. Still, most of the countries that have incorporated such a model have reported optimistic results about the perception of the role and its contribution both to the justice system and to the rights of vulnerable victims, witnesses, and even of accused persons to participate and to be heard in judicial proceedings (Antolak-Saper and MacPherson, 2019; Bekink, 2016; Cashmore and Shackel, 2018; Collins and Krahenbuhl, 2020; Cooper and Mattison, 2017; Department of Justice Northern Ireland, 2016; Fambasayi and Koraan, 2018; Henderson, 2015).…”

Intermediaries and cross‐examination resilience in children: The development of a novel experimental methodology

“…Several other international jurisdictions (e.g., Northern Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, New South Wales, Australia) have adopted intermediary schemes, although details of the schemes vary (see Cooper & Mattison, 2017;Cooper & Wurzel, 2014;Taggart, 2021). Feedback on the RI scheme has been generally positive (Collins & Krahenbuhl, 2020;Ministry of Justice, 2020a;Plotnikoff & Woolfson, 2015), and mock juror studies suggest that the presence of an RI does not have a negative impact on perceptions of child witnesses (e.g., Krahenbuhl, 2019). However, further empirical evidence in relation to RI use during mock crossexaminations is needed and the current study offers exploratory evidence in this regard.…”

“…The role of RIs is wideranging but includes assessing the communication abilities of vulnerable witnesses and offering impartial and specific advice on posing best practice questions by accommodating each individual child's language and communication needs. The aim is to facilitate communication between the child and relevant professionals to ensure it is complete, coherent and accurate (Collins & Krahenbuhl, 2020;Cooper & Wurzel, 2014;Krahenbuhl, 2019). Several other international jurisdictions (e.g., Northern Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, New South Wales, Australia) have adopted intermediary schemes, although details of the schemes vary (see Cooper & Mattison, 2017;Cooper & Wurzel, 2014;Taggart, 2021).…”

The Juxtaposition of the Child as a Witness and a Victim: An Analysis of Legal Policy Affecting Young Witnesses in Canada

“…Additionally, they assess personality differences among each witness, including their attention span, listening abilities, and possible gaps in comprehension (Collins & Krahenbuhl, 2020). This model embodies an individualized approach for each child witness to encounter appropriate questioning practices tailored to their specific needs during the police interview.…”

“…This is unsuitable for police services, in particular, who need to take a statement while the memories about the event from the child are freshest. RIs themselves in England and Wales, for example, have called for more resources to improve their training as well as legal professionals to be trained further (Collins & Krahenbuhl, 2020). Despite being established in their roles, RIs still report experiences of needing more judicial support as a source of validation and accompanying cooperation from the counsels.…”