Question Types, Responsiveness and Self-contradictions when Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Question Alleged Victims of Child Sexual Abuse

Children's Elaborated Responses to Yes-No Questions in Forensic Interviews About Sexual Abuse

Children tend to answer yes-no questions with unelaborated "yes" and "no" responses, but the types of details likely omitted from unelaborated answers have not been explored. This study examined 379 4- to 12-year-olds' answers to yes-no questions in forensic interviews about CSA (N = 11,187), focusing on age differences in elaborated responses. As expected, older children elaborated more frequently than younger children. Our novel categorization of elaboration types revealed that although there were no age differences in children's use of nominal corrections (correcting a label), or in emphatic negations (giving forceful denials), older children were more likely to give narrative elaborations (providing additional narrative information), wh-elaborations (answering implicit wh-questions), and qualified elaborations (avoiding potentially misleading implications of unelaborated "yes" and "no" responses). The results suggest that children's developing understanding of the implied meaning of questions and responses helps to explain age differences in elaborative responses to yes-no questions.

Lawyers rapport building practices with child witnesses

BACKGROUND

Existing literature on rapport building in forensic interviews with children has primarily focused on police or social workers (Collins et al., 2002); overlooking the lawyer-child relationship.

OBJECTIVE

The present study was a novel exploration of the rapport building process between lawyers and child witnesses during the interview stage of a criminal proceeding.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

A total of 67 Canadian lawyers (Mage = 41.69, SD = 11.19; 51 % female-identifying) with experience questioning child witnesses (i.e., under 18 years old) were surveyed on their rapport building with child witnesses.

METHODS

A self-report survey was used to assess how lawyers conceptualize and engage in rapport building with child witnesses.

RESULTS

Lawyers were found to perceive rapport building as an important element when working with child witnesses; however, the lawyers' self-reported rapport building techniques overlooked several important elements of rapport building identified in forensic interviewing literature. Overall, the role of the lawyer (i.e., prosecution or defence), but rarely gender, influenced their self-reported rapport building methods. Prosecution lawyers tended to report behaviors that were more aligned with creating an interpersonal connection during the rapport building phase with the child, such as creating an environment where the child feels safe and comfortable.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide insight into how lawyers conceptualize and engage in rapport building with child witnesses. Overall, the lawyers perceived rapport building as an important element with child witnesses, but only some of the techniques mentioned are considered best practices to build rapport with children.

Exploring how attorneys address grooming in criminal trials of child sexual abuse

Grooming is a common tactic among perpetrators of child sexual abuse (CSA). It is important that grooming is addressed in court to explain the unintuitive ways a child may act when they have been victims of abuse. The present study draws upon 134 transcripts of CSA criminal trials to establish how attorneys talk about grooming in court. Only 1.8% of attorney's questions addressed grooming behaviors. The majority of these focusing on exposure to pornography (27%) or boundary pushing (19%). Invitations elicited the most productive reports of grooming from children. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion with which defense and prosecuting attorney's raised grooming issues, with prosecutors raising grooming issues more often than defense attorneys. We suggest that attorneys consider devoting proportionally more time to addressing grooming in court, to help jurors demystify common myths surrounding CSA.

Lawyers' experience questioning children in Canadian court

BACKGROUND

International research has explored lawyer-child interactions in court; however, little focus has been spent examining other aspects of lawyers' interactions with children (e.g., interview preparation; building rapport).

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigated lawyer's self-reported interactions with child witnesses.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Participants included 96 lawyers (M_age = 40.34, SD = 11.07; 52 % female) practicing in Canada with experience questioning child witnesses (under 18 years old).

METHODS

A survey was used to gather self-reported data on how lawyers prepare for, question, and respond to children as witnesses in court. We then explored whether these strategies differed depending on the role of the Canadian lawyer (i.e., prosecution or defence), experience, or gender.

RESULTS

Results indicate that lawyers report and demonstrate knowledge consistent with current best practices in questioning children. While gender and experience did not appear to play a strong role in lawyer-child interactions, prosecutors reported behavior more consistent with best practices compared to defence lawyers.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide important insight into strengths and weaknesses of lawyer-child interactions in court as well as highlight a strong need for future research to examine the link between self-reported behavior (i.e., perceived behavior) with observable behavior (i.e., actual behavior) in lawyer-child interactions.

Did Your Mom Help You Remember?: An Examination of Attorneys' Subtle Questioning About Suggestive Influence to Children Testifying About Child Sexual Abuse

Researchers studying children's reports of sexual abuse have focused on how questioners overtly assess coaching and truthfulness (e.g., "Did someone tell you what to say?"). Yet attorneys, and defense attorneys, in particular, may be motivated to ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness in subtle ways, such as with implied meaning (e.g., "Did your mom help you remember?"). Such questions may be particularly challenging for children, who may interpret statements literally, misunderstanding the suggested meaning. The purpose of this study was to examine and categorize how attorneys' ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness. We wanted to learn how attorneys subtly accuse suggestive influence, and how frequently this occurred. We hypothesized that questions indirectly accusing suggestive influence would be common, and that defense attorneys would ask more subtle questions, and fewer overt questions, than prosecutors. We examined 7,103 lines of questioning asked by prosecutors and defense attorneys to 64 children testifying about alleged child sexual abuse. We found that 9% of all attorneys' lines of questioning asked about suggestive influence or truthfulness. The majority (66%) of these were indirect accusations. Indirect accusations of suggestive influence spanned a range of subtleties and topics, including addressing conversational influences (e.g., coaching), incidental influences (e.g., witnessing abuse), and others. We also found defense attorneys were less likely than prosecutors to ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness overtly. We conclude that attorneys commonly ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness in subtle ways that developing children may struggle to understand, and which may result in affirmations of influence, even when allegations are true.

"This Incident Happened When There Were 10 People in the House?" Exploring a Framework to Categorize Defense Attorneys' Plausibility Questioning in CSA Trials

While researchers find that attorneys in CSA trials dedicate substantial time to questioning children about the plausibility of their reports, we know of no study to date that has assessed the types of plausibility issues attorneys raise, the relative frequency of different types, or if attorneys vary their plausibility questioning depending on case characteristics. In the current study we explored these questions. Guided by the story model of jury decision-making, we proposed defense attorneys would raise plausibility issues by 1) highlighting jurors' misconceptions about CSA dynamics; 2) highlighting confusing or implausible statements made by the child; and 3) offering alternative explanations for events. We conducted a content analysis of the cross-examinations of 134 children aged 5-17 testifying about alleged CSA. We found that attorneys raised all three proposed types of plausibility questioning, and they varied their plausibility questioning somewhat by age, severity, child-defendant relationship, and the number of victims in the case. Attorneys' preferred strategy was to highlight jurors' misconceptions about CSA. Prosecutors should address jurors' misconceptions preemptively in direct examinations of children or through expert testimony. Beyond implications for courtroom practices, our plausibility framework may apply to plausibility concerns raised in other crime types, something researchers should explore.

Imprecision About Body Mechanics When Child Witnesses Are Questioned About Sexual Abuse

In child sexual abuse cases, a central part of the child's testimony is their description of the abuse episode. However, it is often difficult for children to describe the body mechanics of abuse, and miscommunications are likely to occur. In the present study, we examined questions about the mechanics of abuse in trial transcripts (N = 63) to identify sources of miscommunication (N = 130) between attorneys and children (5-12 years old, M age at trial = 9.44, SD = 1.97). We found that both attorneys and children used imprecise language, which led to miscommunication. Specifically, the imprecise use of sexual terminology and the word "touch," polarity items, broad open-ended questions, anaphora and elliptical questions, and "how" questions led to imprecision in attorneys' questions. Imprecise attorney questions often elicited underinformative answers from children, including misinterpretations of the grain size (i.e., level of detail) requested. In response to these underinformative answers, attorneys at times asked highly focused and leading questions, which led to further miscommunications. Implications and recommendations for future research on how best to elicit details about the mechanics of abuse from children are discussed.

The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation

Child sexual abuse (CSA) cases involving recantation invoke concerns about children’s reliability. Expert testimony can help explain the complexities of these cases. Experts have historically relied on Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS), yet this is not science-based. In a CSA case involving recantation, how would evidence-based testimony affect perceptions of child credibility when compared to CSAAS? Across 2 studies, we test the effects of expert testimony based on evidence-based science, nonscientific evidence, and experience-based evidence on outcomes in CSA cases involving recantation. Evidence-based testimony led to higher perceptions of credibility and scientific rigor of the evidence when compared to CSAAS testimony. Evidence-based testimony also led to more guilty verdicts when compared to the control. In sum, jurors had some ability to detect evidence strength, such that evidence-based expert testimony was superior to CSAAS testimony in many respects, and consistently superior to experience-based testimony in these cases.

Linguistically complex recognition prompts in pre-recorded cross-examinations

This study examined the effects of pre-trial preparation and pre-recorded cross-examinations on the linguistic complexity of recognition prompts (i.e., option-posing or suggestive questions) used when questioning child victims in English criminal courts. The study also compared the linguistic complexity of recognition prompts that did and did not contain suggestive content. Analyses compared 43 cases that involved pre-recorded cross-examinations with pre-trial preparation and 44 cases that did not, which occurred between 2012 and 2016. Cases utilizing the "special measures" contained fewer linguistically complex prompts with and without suggestive content than did their counterparts, demonstrating the benefits of those special measures. Overall, linguistically complex recognition prompts were more likely to contain suggestive content than other recognition prompts. However, linguistically complex prompts with and without suggestive content were still frequently used despite the special measures, demonstrating the need for further professional training to improve the quality of children's evidence.

Lawyers' Question Repetition and Children's Responses in Scottish Criminal Courts

This study examined the effects of repeated questions (n = 7,968) on fifty-six 5- to 17-year-olds' testimony in child sexual abuse cases in Scottish criminal courts. We examined transcripts of direct- and cross-examinations, categorizing how lawyers asked repeated questions in court and how children responded. Defense lawyers repeated more questions (39.6% of all questions asked) than prosecutors (30.6%) and repeated questions using more suggestive prompts (52% of their repeated questions) than prosecutors (18%) did. In response, children typically repeated or elaborated on their answers and seldom contradicted themselves. Self-contradictions were most often elicited by repeated suggestive prompts posed by defense lawyers. Younger children were asked more repeated questions than older children, but child age was not associated with the types of questions repeated or with how children responded to repetition. Questions repeated after delays elicited more self-contradictions than questions repeated immediately. Most repeated questions (69.2%) were repeated more than once, yet no "asked-and-answered" objections were ever raised. Overall, the findings suggested that lawyers frequently ask children "risky" repeated questions. Official judicial guidance and training is needed to help identify and limit the inappropriate repetition of questions.

"DID YOU EVER FIGHT BACK?": Jurors' Questions to Children Testifying in Criminal Trials About Alleged Sexual Abuse

The current study examined jurors' questions to children in criminal trials assessing children's allegations of sexual abuse, demonstrating a new avenue for studying how jurors think about, respond to, and assess evidence. We used qualitative content analysis to examine jurors' questions to 134, 5- to 17-year-olds alleging sexual abuse in criminal trial testimonies. Five themes emerged: abuse interactions, contextual details of abuse, children's reactions to abuse, children's (delayed) disclosure, and case background details. Jurors often ask about abuse dynamics, the context surrounding abuse, and children's disclosure processes, reflecting common misconceptions about child sexual abuse (CSA), such as whether it is credible to delay disclosure or maintain contact with an alleged perpetrator. This study improves our understanding of how jurors understand and evaluate children's reports of alleged CSA, suggesting that jurors may struggle to understand children's reluctance.

Young Children's Activity Involvement and Responses to Yes/No Questions

In the present study, we investigated younger and older Persian preschoolers' response tendency and accuracy toward yes/no questions about a coloring activity. Overall, 107 three- to four-year-olds and five- to six-year-old children were asked positive and negative yes/no questions about a picture coloring activity. The questions focused on three question contents namely, actions, environment and person. As for children's response tendency, they showed a compliance tendency. That is, they provided yes and no responses to positively and negatively formed questions respectively. Children especially younger ones were more compliant toward positive questions and their tendency decreased by age. In addition, the results revealed children's highest rate of compliance tendency toward environment inquiries. Concerning response accuracy, the effects of age and question content were significant. Specifically, older children provided more accurate responses than their younger counterparts, especially to yes/no questions asked about the actions performed during the activity. The findings suggest that depending on the format and the content of yes/no questions younger and older children's response accuracy and tendency differ.

Differential effects of direct and cross examination on mock jurors' perceptions and memory in cases of child sexual abuse

When children testify in cases of child sexual abuse (CSA), they often provide minimal responses to attorneys' questions. Thus, how attorneys ask questions may be particularly influential in shaping jurors' perceptions and memory for case details. This study examined mock jurors' perceptions after reading an excerpt of a CSA trial transcript. Participants' memory of the excerpt was tested after a two-day delay. We examined how reading a direct or cross-examination excerpt that included either high or low temporal structure impacted participants' perceptions, verdict decisions and memory reports. We found that participants who read a direct examination excerpt rated the child witness as more credible, were more likely to convict the defendant and had more accurate memory reports than those who read a cross-examination excerpt, regardless of temporal structure. Suggestions for improving jurors' comprehension and recall of child statements presented as evidence in CSA cases are discussed.

Assessing Children's Credibility in Courtroom Investigations of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse: Suggestibility, Plausibility, and Consistency

As children's testimonies of child sexual abuse (CSA) often lack concrete evidence to corroborate a child's claims, attorneys devote a substantial amount of time to establishing a child as credible during the course of a trial. Examining 134 CSA victim testimonies for children aged 5-17 (M = 12.48, SD = 3.34; 90% female), we explored how attorneys assess child credibility through specifically targeting children's suggestibility/honesty, plausibility, and consistency. Results revealed that while prosecutors examine plausibility more often to establish credibility, defense attorneys focus their assessments on suggestibility/honesty and potential inconsistency. However, both attorneys asked many more questions about children's consistency than any other area of potential credibility. Furthermore, while prosecutors ask proportionally more credibility-challenging questions of older children, the defense do not. These results suggest that prosecutors may be missing an opportunity to establish children as honest and consistent and elucidate a need to train attorneys on the implications of children's inconsistencies, suggestibility, and plausible abuse dynamics.

Effects of Delay, Question Type, and Socioemotional Support on Episodic Memory Retrieval by Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Twenty-seven autistic children and 32 typically developing (TD) peers were questioned about an experienced event after a two-week delay and again after a two-month delay, using the Revised National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol. Recall prompts elicited more detailed and more accurate responses from children than recognition prompts. Autistic children recalled fewer correct narrative details than TD peers when questioned using open invitations, cued invitations, and directive questions. Nonetheless, they were as accurate as TD peers when responding to all types of prompts. The informativeness and accuracy of children's reports remained unchanged over time. Social support was beneficial when children were interviewed for the first time but not after a longer delay.

Does eyewitness and interviewer gender influence children's reports? An experimental analysis of eyewitness and interviewer gender on children's testimony

This study examines how children's age, gender and interviewer gender affected children's testimony after witnessing a theft. Children (N = 127, age = 6-11 years) witnessed an experimenter (E1) find money, which he/she may/may not have taken. E1 then asked the children to falsely deny that the theft occurred, falsely accuse E1 of taking the money, or tell the truth when interviewed by a second experimenter. Falsely denying or falsely accusing influenced children's forthcomingness and quality of their testimony. When accusing, boys were significantly more willing than girls to disclose about the theft earlier and without being asked directly. When truthfully accusing, children gave lengthier testimony to same-gendered adults. When denying, children were significantly more willing to disclose the theft earlier to male interviewers than to females. As children aged, they were significantly less likely to lie, more likely to disclose earlier when accusing, and give lengthier and more consistent testimony.

The Productivity of Wh- Prompts in Child Forensic Interviews

Child witnesses are often asked wh- prompts (what, how, why, who, when, where) in forensic interviews. However, little research has examined the ways in which children respond to different wh- prompts, and no previous research has investigated productivity differences among wh- prompts in investigative interviews. This study examined the use and productivity of wh- prompts in 95 transcripts of 4- to 13-year-olds alleging sexual abuse in child investigative interviews. What-how questions about actions elicited the most productive responses during both the rapport building and substantive phases. Future research and practitioner training should consider distinguishing among different wh- prompts.

Judges' delivery of ground rules to child witnesses in Australian courts

Ground rules directions are given to children in forensic interviews to explain what is expected of them, and to reduce their tendency to acquiesce to erroneous or incomprehensible questions. Ground rules may also be necessary when children provide testimony in court. Drawing on research conducted for the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the present study examined the use of ground rules directions delivered in court in 52 trials by 24 presiding judges in three jurisdictions to 57 child complainants (aged 7-17.5 years). Eleven categories of rules were identified. The number of words spoken to deliver each rule was counted, and grade-level readability scores were calculated as a proxy for the complexity of the ground rules. When judges asked comprehension or practice questions, the question types were coded. More than one third of the children (35%) received no ground rules directions from the judge; the remaining 65% received directions on an average of 3.5 types of ground rules out of a maximum of 11 types. While comprehension questions were common, practice questions were rare. Comprehension questions were most often presented in a yes/no format that implied the expected response, although this form of question is unlikely to provide an effective assessment of a child's comprehension. Neither the number of rules delivered nor the number of words used was related to children's age. Implications for children's court testimony are discussed.

'Where were your clothes?' Eliciting descriptions of clothing placement from children alleging sexual abuse in criminal trials and forensic interviews

PURPOSE

The present study examined how children alleging sexual abuse are asked about clothing placement during abusive episodes, both in criminal trials and forensic interviews. The placement of clothing is of great importance, because it facilitates distinguishing abusive touch from non-abusive touch, as well as the severity of abuse when the touching is in fact sexual. If clothing has not been removed, then sexual abuse appears less likely and certain types of sexual contact are physically impossible (or at least highly improbable).

METHODS

We examined how trial attorneys (n = 142) and forensic interviewers in investigative interviews (n = 155) questioned 5- 12-year-olds about the location of clothing during alleged sexual abuse. To do so, we identified all question-answer pairs that included references to clothing placement, and coded for the clothing item mentioned, whether the interviewer elicited information about clothing placement or the child spontaneously provided such information, question-type, and response-type.

RESULTS

Discussions about clothing placement were commonplace in both settings, particularly in court. Fewer than one in five question-answer pairs about clothing placement were spontaneous mentions by children; the questioner elicited most discussions. When interviewers asked wh- questions rather than yes/no and forced-choice questions, children provided more elaboration, more detailed clothing information, and were over six times more likely to describe clothing placement in a fashion that could not be captured by a single preposition (e.g., neither on nor off).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that descriptions of clothing placement are subject to serious misinterpretation when closed-ended questions are asked.

Interviews of Children in a Portuguese Special Judicial Procedure

Since 2007, alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Portugal have provided evidence in a mandatory "Declarações para Memória Futura" (DMF; English transl. 'Statement for future use') proceeding. In order to protect children from having to testify in court, interviews conducted at the DMF can be used later as trial evidence because the hearings are conducted by judges. The present study examined 137 interviews with 3- to 17-year-olds conducted in several Portuguese criminal courts. Detailed examination of interview transcripts showed that 69% of all questions asked were option-posing questions, 16% were directive questions, 11% were suggestive questions, and only 3% were open-ended prompts. The vast majority of details provided by children were thus obtained using the risky recognition-based prompts (i.e., option posing and suggestive questions) associated with the risks of contaminating and limiting children's informativeness, both potential threats to the credibility of their testimony. There is an urgent need to address this issue and consider the implementation of a scientifically validated structured interview protocol in Portugal. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Children's Uncertain Responses when Testifying about Alleged Sexual Abuse in Scottish Courts

This study examined the uncertain responses of 56 alleged sexual abuse victims, aged 5-17 years, testifying in Scottish criminal court trials. Don't know/remember ground rules were explained to 38% of the children and each child reported uncertainty in response to 15% of the questions on average. Uncertain responding was associated with expressions of resistance and confusion, questioning context (proportionally more regarding substantive than non-substantive issues), question content (least to disclosure-focused questions), utterance type (more to directives, particularly those posed by defense lawyers; more to recall-based than recognition prompts), and age (children in mid-adolescence were less likely to respond uncertainly than those who were either older or younger). There were no associations between expressions of uncertainty and ground rule administration, or with whether or not the question focused on central rather than peripheral details about the alleged crimes. Findings highlight concerns surrounding preparatory procedures to help witnesses, especially adolescents, indicate uncertainty when testifying. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sexual abuse and preschoolers: Forensic details in regard of question types

The present study looks into the association between the types of questions used by interviewers and the number of details obtained among preschoolers during an investigative interview. An innovative aspect of this study concerns the analysis of question subtypes (eg. open-ended directive and closed-ended). Analysis of variance were carried out on 55 NICHD interview protocols conducted among children aged three to five years old who disclosed an episode of sexual abuse. Findings reveal that interviewers' style is in accordance with best practices in conducting investigative interviews with children allegedly victims of sexual abuse. As expected, there are more details in answers: 1) provided by older children compared to younger counterparts; 2) following invitations compared to all other question types. However, the analysis of question subtypes has shown that answers given to an open-ended question using cues (cued invitations or directive open-ended) obtained more details concerning the incident compared to the absence of cues (general invitations). These findings support the fact that children as young as three years old are able to produce informative responses when questioned appropriately about the CSA incident and propose reconsidering the types of question that should mainly be used with them. Findings suggest that the use of open-ended questions, using a cue previously mentioned in the testimony of the child, helps provide a detailed account during an investigative interview conducted among preschoolers allegedly victims of sexual abuse.

Wrongful Acquittals of Sexual Abuse

Ross Cheit's book The Witch-Hunt Narrative highlights the difficulties of prosecuting child sexual abuse. Drawing examples from a single case, Alex A., we examine the ways in which false acquittals of sexual abuse are likely to occur. First, prosecutors tend to question children in ways that undermine their productivity and credibility. Second, prosecutors have difficulty in explaining to juries the dynamics of sexual abuse and disclosure, making children's acquiescence to abuse and their failure to disclose when abuse first occurs incredible. Third, attorneys undermine children's credibility by pushing them to provide difficult to estimate temporal and numerical information. A post-script to the Alex A. case illustrates the costs of wrongful acquittals.

The structural linguistic complexity of lawyers' questions and children's responses in Scottish criminal courts

In the first study to systematically assess the structural linguistic complexity of lawyers' questions of children in Scotland, we examined 56 trial transcripts of 5- to 17-year-old children testifying as alleged victims of sexual abuse. Complexity was assessed using 8 quantitative measures of each utterance's components (number of questions, phrases, clauses, sentences, false starts, average word count, word length, and sentence length) and a composite measure was used in the analyses. Lawyers did not alter the complexity of questions when prompting children of different ages. Defense lawyers asked more structurally complex questions than prosecutors. Directive questions were the least structurally complex questions, followed by option-posing questions. Suggestive questions, followed by invitations, were the most structurally complex questions. Option-posing and suggestive questions were more complex when asked by defense lawyers than prosecutors. Of suggestive questions, confrontation and tagged questions were more complex than any other question type. Increased structural complexity led to more unresponsiveness, more expressions of uncertainty, and more self-contradictions regardless of which lawyer asked, the question type, or the children's ages. These findings highlight the additional risks associated with asking some types of questions in structurally complex ways and highlight the need for further innovations (e.g., the use of intermediaries) to facilitate the questioning of vulnerable witnesses in Scottish criminal courts.

Developmentally and Trauma-Sensitive Courtrooms

Courtrooms in the United States whether family court or criminal court fall far short of being either developmentally or trauma sensitive. While there is growing recognition that vulnerable child witnesses are at risk of retraumatization by court procedures and some judges have used their discretionary powers to render courtrooms less toxic to children, the system was designed by adults for adults, and certainly not for children. The court process especially in criminal trials does not typically take into account the developmental constraints of children nor do they fully understand trauma in children and the risks to testifying child witnesses. Humanistic psychology has long stood for social justice and compassion toward our most vulnerable humans, especially children, but the long and slow-to-change traditions of the court system in the United States creates an environment that is inhospitable to children and even older victims as illustrated by the low rate of prosecutions in rape cases. This article outlines the distressing conditions that await child victims/witnesses in this country in comparison with other developed countries and an innovative, out-of-the box solution that does not interfere with the rights of the accused.

Attorney Questions Predict Jury-eligible Adult Assessments of Attorneys, Child Witnesses, and Defendant Guilt

Children are often the primary source of evidence in maltreatment cases, particularly cases of child sexual abuse, and may be asked to testify in court. Although best-practice protocols for interviewing children suggest that interviewers ask open-ended questions to elicit detailed responses from children, during in-court testimony, attorneys tend to rely on closed-ended questions that elicit simple (often "yes" or "no") responses (e.g., Andrews, Lamb, & Lyon, ; Klemfuss, Quas, & Lyon, ). How then are jurors making decisions about children's credibility and ultimately the case outcome? The present study examined the effect of two attorney-specific factors (e.g., temporal structure and questioning phase) on mock jurors' perceptions of attorney performance, child witness credibility, storyline clarity, and defendant guilt. Participants were randomly assigned to read a trial excerpt from one of eight conditions and were then asked to evaluate the attorney, child witness, and the case. Selected excerpts were from criminal court case transcripts and contained either high attorney temporal structure (e.g., use of temporal markers) or low temporal structure (e.g., frequent topic switching), involved direct or cross-examination, and represented cases resulting in a conviction or acquittal. Child responses were kept consistent across all excerpts. Results showed that participants perceived the attorney's performance and child's credibility more favorably and thought the storyline was clearer when attorneys provided high rather than low temporal structure and when the excerpt contained direct rather than cross-examination. Participants who read a direct rather than cross-examination excerpt were also more likely to think the defendant was guilty. The study highlights the impact of attorney questioning style on mock jurors' perceptions. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Do Prosecutors Use Interview Instructions or Build Rapport with Child Witnesses?

This study examined the quality of interview instructions and rapport-building provided by prosecutors to 168 children aged 5-12 years testifying in child sexual abuse cases, preceding explicit questions about abuse allegations. Prosecutors failed to effectively administer key interview instructions, build rapport, or rely on open-ended narrative producing prompts during this early stage of questioning. Moreover, prosecutors often directed children's attention to the defendant early in the testimony. The productivity of different types of wh- questions varied, with what/how questions focusing on actions being particularly productive. The lack of instructions, poor quality rapport-building, and closed-ended questioning suggest that children may not be adequately prepared during trial to provide lengthy and reliable reports to their full ability.