|
NZ Herald
December 12, 2003
Flaws in children's evidence says study
NZPA
The vast majority of child witnesses and young
victims change their testimony while giving evidence in court, university
researchers have found.
Otago University psychologists found that 85
per cent of children involved in two separate studies changed their stories
when subjected to cross-examination.
They have concluded that questioning techniques used in courts are not
suitable for children.
Dunedin author Lynley Hood, whose book A City Possessed says the testimony of
children in the Peter Ellis sexual abuse case was tainted in part by methods
used to question the child complainants, said the findings were not
surprising.
Psychology lecturer Dr Rachel Zajac said the researchers studied the court
transcripts from the cross-examination of 21 children aged 5 to 13 involved
in sexual abuse cases.
Of those, 75 per cent changed at least one aspect of their testimony under
cross-examination, compared with statements given when primary evidence was
gathered.
The researchers were unable to gauge whether their testimony was changed to
become more accurate or less.
This prompted the researchers to make a second study in which 45 5 and
6-year-olds from the Dunedin
area were taken on a trip to a police station.
They were interviewed about the experience, then eight months later
requestioned using typical cross-examination techniques.
The time gap was to simulate delays between primary evidence gathering and
trials.
During the cross-examination, 85 per cent of the children changed at least
one aspect of their testimony.
About one-third changed all of their responses.
"The biggest concerning finding was that they changed their responses
irrespective of accuracy," Dr Zajac said.
Under cross-examination, the children were as likely to change a correct
response as an incorrect one, and the questioning reduced children's
accuracy.
During cross-examination, children were frequently asked leading or complex
questions, or ambiguous questions they did not understand, Dr Zajac said.
"Leading the witness is permitted and it's even actively
encouraged."
She said the researchers would like the cross-examination system changed to
ensure judges more often intervened when questioning was not appropriate and
children were better prepared to cope with cross-examination by defence
lawyers.
The research was not prompted by the Ellis case, which was based on child
testimony. But that case highlighted how careful people had to be when
interviewing children.
Lynley Hood said a growing body of evidence showed how children's evidence
was vulnerable to pressure and manipulation.
The Law Society's criminal law committee convener, Philip Morgan, QC, of Hamilton, said that he
accepted there was likely to be room for change in some aspects of giving
evidence, but it had to be weighed against other aspects of justice.
"People accused of a serious crime need to be able to challenge the
accusations and defend themselves against them," he said.
"The only effective way is through cross-examination.
"If there is a suggestion children only ever tell the truth and that the
people accused of crimes against them should be stopped from challenging
that, I could not agree."
|
