A guide to clarifying evidence in Australian child forensic interviews

Purpose – Interviewing victims of child sex abuse requires considerable care in order to minimise error. Due to children’s heightened suggestibility any question asked of a child could potentially incite error that could undermine the witness’s credibility. A focus group was conducted in order to facilitate the development of guidance for interviewers around the circumstances in which it is necessary to ask children follow-up questions in an interview. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach – Seven Crown prosecutors representing every Australian state and territory (with the exception of one small state) were issued with 25 hypothetical narrative accounts of child abuse and asked to indicate what information, if any, required follow-up in the child’s narrative. Their responses and rationale for requiring following up in some cases and not others were discussed.

Findings – Thematic analysis revealed three recommendations to guide questioning: whether the case involved identification or recognition evidence; the presence of contextual features that may influence the witness’s memory, or that should trigger a particular line of questioning; and whether the information can or should be sought at a later stage by the trial prosecutor, rather than by the interviewer. Practical implications – The recommendations are discussed within the context of their implications for interviewing, that is, how each recommendation could be implemented in practice.

Originality/value – The present study extends prior literature by elucidating principles to guide decision making across interview topic areas. The need for such guidance is highlighted by research suggesting that topics such as offender identity, offence time and place, and witnesses are a source of overzealous questioning in interviews.

Identifying the characteristics of child sexual abuse cases associated with the child or child's parents withdrawing the complaint

Most child sexual abuse cases do not result in a full trial or guilty plea; rather, case attrition occurs at earlier stages of the criminal justice system. One reason for the attrition of these cases is the withdrawal of complaints, by children or their caregivers. The aim of the current study was to determine the case characteristics associated with complaint withdrawal in child sexual abuse cases by the child or his or her parents once a report has been made to authorities. All child sexual abuse incidents reported to authorities in one jurisdiction of Australia in 2011 were analyzed (N=659). A multinomial logistic regression was used to predict the following case outcomes: (1) withdrawn by the child or his or her parents, (2) exited for other reasons (e.g., the alleged offender was not identified, the child refused to be interviewed), and (3) resulted in a charge. Five predictors significantly added to the prediction of case outcome: child age, suspect gender, suspect age, child-suspect relationship, and abuse frequency. These results should contribute to the design of interventions in order to reduce complaint withdrawals if these withdrawals are not in the child's best interests.

Pathway to justice: Examining the attrition of child sexual abuse cases

The attrition of child sexual abuse cases from the criminal justice process was explored. Recommendations to prevent attrition included: more effective communication between stakeholders; enabling connections between children and adults to facilitate disclosures; introduction of peer support programs to prevent withdrawal; and educating children about sexual victimisation to reduce withdrawal.