000			05247nam a22003017a 4500
999			_c6692 _d6692
005			20250625151529.0
008			200612s2020 ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_aStolzenberg, Stacia N. _99179
245			_aChildren’s allegations of sexual abuse in criminal trials : _bassessing defense attacks on credibility and identifying effective prosecution methods _cStacia N. Stolzenberg
260			_bNCJRS, _c2020
300			_aelectronic document (35 pages) ; PDF file
500			_aAvailable April 2020
500			_aThis resource has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. This resource is being made publically available through the Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Document number: 254627
520			_aDue to delays in reporting, lacking witnesses, and infrequent medical and physical evidence, in criminal investigations of alleged child sexual abuse (CSA), children’s reports of abuse become central to determining whether a crime occurred. While researchers acknowledge that developmental vulnerabilities make children particularly susceptible to courtroom questioning, potentially influencing the reliability and validity of their in-court reports, little attention has been paid to how children are questioned in-court. Only one previous dataset, collected on older cases, can speak to questioning practices in the United States. This was the purpose of the present project: to examine how attorneys establish and attack children’s credibility. In addition, we were interested in assessing how attorneys would phrase questions, how children would respond, and whether questioning practices would exhibit developmental sensitivity. Collecting cases prosecuted between 2005 and 2015 in Maricopa County, Arizona, we examined transcripts of 134 minors (5-17-year-olds) testifying about alleged child sexual abuse in criminal trials. The majority of cases involved allegations against a familiar, if not familial, adult. Children commonly alleged repeated abuse. All question and answer pairs were coded for whether questions assessed three areas of credibility: suggestibility and honesty, plausibility, and consistency. In addition, all question and answer pairs were systematically coded for the linguistic form of each attorney question and each child’s subsequent response. Consistency concerns seemed to be embedded in nearly all questions in some capacity, representing 79% of prosecutor questions and 89% of defense questions. In addition, prosecutors devoted more time to establishing plausibility than did the defense, at the expense of addressing suggestibility and honesty, to which the defense gave proportionally more attention. Prosecutors also asked the fewest credibility questions of the youngest children, while defense attorneys did not differ in the proportion of credibility questions by the age of the child. Closed-ended questions accounted for three-out-of-four attorney questions; while children provided elaborative responses to open questions, they provided unleaborative responses to closed-ended questions. We found that declarative questions, or statements posed as questions (e.g. “He hit you?”) were common, representing 21% of overall questions, and indirect yes/no questions (e.g. “Do you remember if he hit you?”) were common, describing 11% of all questions asked. Children provided the most unelaborative and fewest elaborative responses to declarative questions, and the most non-substantive responses to indirect yes/no questions, when compared to other closedended questions. While prosecutors were more likely to ask open-questions, and less likely to ask suggestive questions, when compared to the defense, they had similar rates of closed-ended questions (including declarative and indirect yes/no questions). There were few differences in questioning practices, or response patterns, based on the age of the child. Our data demonstrate that declarative and indirect yes/no questions produce problematic response patterns. In addition, the issues of consistency, or inconsistency, dominate in courtroom investigations of CSA, whereas issues of suggestive influence, honesty, and plausibility receive significantly less attention. Furthermore, according to the kinds of credibility questions observed, children may not be developmentally mature enough to answer the questions asked of them - a tactic that may in itself be undermining credibility, particularly by the defense. Researchers should work alongside prosecuting attorneys to develop effective training methods, as little is known about how attorneys learn how to question children in these cases. (Author's abstract). Record #6692
650			_aCHILD SEXUAL ABUSE _9121
650			_aCHILDREN _9127
650			_aCOURTS _9162
650			_aCRIMINAL JUSTICE _9167
650			_aDISCLOSURE _9199
650			_aEVIDENCE _9237
650		0	_aVICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE _96716
650		0	_aYOUNG PEOPLE _9660
651			_aINTERNATIONAL _93624
651		4	_aUNITED STATES _92646
856			_uhttps://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/254627.pdf?utm_content=default&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery
942			_2ddc _cREPORT