000			05695nam a22004097a 4500
999			_c6691 _d6691
005			20250625151529.0
008			200612s2020 -nz||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_aRandell, Isabel _93524
245			_aYoung witnesses in New Zealand's Sexual Violence Pilot Courts _cIsabel Randell, Fred Seymour, Clare McCann, Tamara Anderson and Suzanne Blackwell
260			_bUniversity of Auckland ; _bNew Zealand Law Foundation, _c2020
300			_aelectronic document (72 pages) ; PDF file
500			_aPublished May 2020
520			_aThe present research was initiated in response to the establishment of New Zealand’s Sexual Violence Courts Pilot in late 2016. One of the stated intentions of the court was to improve the experience of complainants. This research aims to contribute to innovation in court processes and the further development of the Sexual Violence Court Pilot. It comprised two studies with a focus on young witnesses. The first study involved interviews with caregivers and young witnesses who had testified in Sexual Violence Pilot Court trials with the aim of identifying sources of stress and support during court involvement. Themes identified were that the period between reporting an alleged offence to police and the trial is far too long and is very stressful; it is difficult to move forward with life until the trial has concluded; cross examination is distressing; the court environment (comfort and safety) matters; safety and distance from the defendant when at court is extremely important; separation of young witnesses from their caregivers during the court appearance is difficult; there is a lack of information throughout the process; and parenting young witnesses through the court process is challenging. The findings indicated that the pilot has yet to have a significant impact on the distress of young witnesses. A multi-agency approach is indicated to improve support and information provision during the period awaiting trial. Within the courts’ jurisdiction, reducing pre-trial delay and improving the conduct of trials is indicated if the courts are to achieve their goal of minimising the negative impact of court involvement on these vulnerable young witnesses. The second study involved a detailed analysis of transcripts of testimony of young witnesses from two pilot courts and two non-pilot courts. Analyses focused on the type of questions asked, complexity of language, the timing and duration of young witnesses’ evidence, provision of breaks, and judge intervention. The inclusion of non-pilot courts allowed for a snapshot of practice in Aotearoa New Zealand generally as well as a comparison between pilot and non-pilot courts. The average time between the complaint and trial for the pilot courts was 13.2 months and for the non-pilot courts was 16.3 months. The analysis of children’s courtroom testimony revealed that use of complex language likely to be confusing to witnesses was common. There were few differences in use of complex language between pilot and nonpilot courts or between defence lawyers and prosecutors. In terms of question types, leading questions were common. Leading questions are generally regarded as contrary to children’s ability to give best evidence. Over a quarter of questions asked during cross examination were .leading (other) and more than one in ten questions were leading tag. Consistent with prior research, defence lawyers were 21.44 times more likely than prosecutors to use leading (tag) questions and were also significantly more likely to use leading (other) questions. Prosecutors were more likely than were defence lawyers to use open questions, facilitators, and option posing questions. Findings indicated that the pilot courts may have had some (although limited) impact on the use of different question types, although question types that are counter to best evidence were prevalent across both pilot and non-pilot courts. Provision of breaks and judge intervention in inappropriate questioning were rare. Overall there appears to have been little change in the experience of young people and their caregivers in their participation in the courts. Nor has there been significant change in the conduct of lawyers in questioning young witnesses, either in comparison with similar studies over the last two decades, or between pilot and other courts. Proposals for change are presented. These have much in common with those contained in other recent reports, indicating a consensus about further reforms that would likely reduce the stress on young witnesses’ experience and facilitate their ability to give best evidence. (Author's abstract). Record #6691
610		4	_aDistrict Court of New Zealand _98563
610		0	_aMinistry of Justice | Tahū o te Ture _913820
650			_aCHILD SEXUAL ABUSE _9121
650			_aCHILDREN _9127
650			_aCOURTS _9162
650			_aCRIMINAL JUSTICE _9167
650			_aEVIDENCE _9237
650			_aLAW REFORM _9338
650		4	_aSEXUAL VIOLENCE _9531
650			_aSEXUAL VIOLENCE COURT _98564
650		0	_aVICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE _96716
650			_aYOUNG PEOPLE _9660
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
651			_aWHANGĀREI _92839
651			_aAUCKLAND _92664
700			_aSeymour, Fred _92089
700			_aMcCann, Clare _99177
700			_aAnderson, Tamara _99178
700			_aBlackwell, Suzanne _9796
856			_uhttps://www.lawfoundation.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/2018_45_10_Young-Witnesses-in-NZs-Sexual-Violence-Pilot-Courts-final-research-report-rcvd-7.5.2020.pdf
856			_uhttps://www.lawfoundation.org.nz/?p=11181 _yMedia release
942			_2ddc _cREPORT