Police officers' and legal professionals' perceptions regarding how children are, and should be, questioned about repeated abuse

This study explored the perceptions of police officers and legal professionals (i.e., prosecutors, defence lawyers and a judge) about (a) what particularisation is, (b) the type of information that is required for particularisation to occur, and (c) how particularisation is best achieved in cases of repeated child abuse. The professionals' perceptions (all experts in this area) were elicited via individual in-depth semi-structured interviews. While all participants acknowledged the importance of particularisation, the views of the police officers varied in several important ways to those of the other professionals. Overall, the police officers perceived that highly specific details (such as the location, date and time of the offence) are essential for particularisation to occur, and that maximising the number of separate offences and specific details about each offence increases the chance of successful prosecution. In contrast, the legal professionals perceived that the primacy goal of the police officers should be to elicit a free-narrative account of one or more offences. A high proportion of specific questions was perceived to negatively impact on the child's credibility by contaminating the evidence. The implications of these findings are discussed.

A qualitative examination of police officers' questioning of children about repeated events

For an offender to be convicted in relation to repeated child abuse, most jurisdictions require that each separate act be identified with reasonable precision with reference to time, place, or some other unique contextual detail (S v. R, 1989). The current study provided a qualitative examination of the way in which police officers assist children to identify and distinguish between occurrences of a repeated event. Field, as well as mock interviews (about an innocuous staged event) were examined, with child witnesses' ages ranging from 3 to 16 years. Overall, several problems in the questioning were highlighted. These included: over-reliance on specific questions, use of 'labels' for occurrences without inquiring as to whether these were unique, and frequent shifting of the focus between occurrences. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Improving the legal aspects of police interviewing of suspects

The purpose of this paper is to provide some guidance to police interviewers and trainers in relation to improving the legal aspects of police questioning of suspects. The paper is written with reference to Victorian legislation. Sixteen professionals (defence barristers, academics, prosecutors, and detectives), all with extensive knowledge of the law and experience evaluating police interviews with suspects, took part in individual indepth interviews (M ¼ 100 minutes). The aim of the interviews was to discuss the limitations of police interviews with suspects and to provide exemplars of concerns from a set of de-identified transcripts that had been provided to the professionals prior to their interviews with us. Overall, four key limitations were raised: (a) inadequate particularisation of offences, (b) inappropriate phrasing of questions, (c) poor introduction of allegations, and (d) questions that unfairly ask the suspect to comment on the victim’s perspective. These concerns and their practical implications are discussed.