The prevalence of declarative and indirect yes/no Questions when children testify in criminal cases of child sexual abuse in the United States

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.

Developmental Considerations in How Defense Attorneys Employ Child Sexual Abuse and Rape Myths When Questioning Alleged Victims of Child Sexual Abuse

Myths and misconceptions surrounding the nature of sexual assault play a role in shaping the perceptions of victims as credible and perpetrators as culpable. Defense attorneys often capitalize on myths in court as an element of their defense strategies. Researchers have established that myths about both rape generally, and child sexual abuse (CSA) specifically, appear with regularity in criminal trials of children who have made an allegation of CSA. Yet no work has systematically and quantitatively examined the impact of a child's age on the probability that attorneys will ask a myth-consistent question in criminal trials of CSA. In the current study, we examine 6,384 lines of questioning across 134 criminal trials of CSA to assess whether defense attorneys employ developmentally sensitive strategies when asking children questions that draw upon myths about sexual violence (CSA myths: disclosure myths, extent of harm, a child's positive relationship with their perpetrator, and the presence of witnesses; Rape myths: force and resistance, motives to lie, victim precipitation, and character issues). We found that attorneys did not vary their use of CSA myths by the age of the child. However, the probability that a child would receive a rape myth-consistent line of questioning, increased with a child's age. This work suggests that attorneys are, at times, strategic in their use of myths and employ these adult rape myths in ways that are plausible, purposeful, and likely impactful. The strategic use of these questions may acknowledge young children's limited development but may place too great a demand on older children's developmental capacities. Prosecutors should be prepared to counterquestion these myths in redirect examination.

Elaborations and Denials in Children's Responses to Yes-No Any/Some Questions in Forensic Interviews

This study examined 379 4- to 12-year-old children's answers to any/some and other yes-no questions in forensic interviews about sexual abuse (N = 10,041). Yes-no questions that include the terms any/some (e.g., "Did he say anything?") often implicitly ask for elaboration when the answer is yes ("What did he say?"). However, children may give unelaborated responses to yes-no questions, fail to recognize implicit requests, and falsely respond "no." As predicted, children gave more wh- elaborations in response to any/some questions than other yes-no questions, but younger children elaborated less often than older children. Also as predicted, children responded "no" more often to any/some questions than to other yes-no questions, and more often to "any" than to "some" questions. "No" responses were also more common when children were asked potentially vague anything/something questions and else/other/different questions. The results highlight the potential risks of asking children any/some questions.

Attorneys' Questions and Children's Responses Referring to the Nature of Sexual Touch in Child Sexual Abuse Trials

Eliciting clear descriptions of sexual body parts and abusive touch in child sexual abuse trials is challenging because of children's immaturity and embarrassment. This study examined references to sexual body part knowledge and sexual touch in attorneys' questions and 5- to 10-year-old children's responses (N = 2,247) in 113 child sexual abuse trials. Regardless of children's age, attorneys and children primarily used unclear colloquialisms to refer to sexual body parts. Questions asking children to name sexual body parts elicited more uninformative responses than questions about the function of sexual body parts. In turn, questions about the function of sexual body parts were more likely to increase the specificity of body part identifications than questions about the location of sexual body parts. Attorneys predominantly used option-posing (yes-no and forced choice) questions to ask about sexual body part knowledge, the location of touch, the method or manner of touching, skin-to-skin contact, penetration, and how the touching felt. Generally, wh- questions were no more likely than option-posing questions to elicit uninformative responses, and consistently elicited more child-generated information. The results question the legal assumption that children's uninformative responses when testifying about sexual abuse should be overcome by asking option-posing questions.

Myths and Misunderstandings About Child Sexual Abuse in Criminal Investigations

Researchers have established that rape myths shape perceptions of victims and perpetrators in criminal cases. Researchers have devoted less attention to exploring the impact of child sexual abuse (CSA) myths in court. While we know that jurors believe myths and misconceptions about the nature of CSA, no work has explored how these myths appear during the prosecution of CSA cases. The purpose of the present investigation was to assess how defense attorneys apply myths more specific to CSA in the questioning of children testifying about alleged CSA. The present study compliments and expands upon a previous study by St. George and colleagues (2021a), where authors examined the use of rape myths in the questioning of children making allegations of CSA. In the current study, we examined testimonies of 122 children testifying in criminal cases of alleged CSA in the United States. We qualitatively coded 6,384 lines of questioning for references to CSA-focused myths related to the disclosure process, witnesses and privacy issues, assumptions of harm, and the child's positive relationship with the perpetrator. These myths were common, occurring in over 10% of defense attorneys' lines of questioning. Disclosure issues were the most frequent, followed by witness and privacy issues, assumptions of harm, and the child's positive relationship with their perpetrator. In many cases, attorneys employed different strategies across child's age to highlight these myths. These findings compliment those of prior work suggesting that CSA myths, much like rape myths, are appearing with regularity. Defense attorneys are likely capitalizing on jurors' misconceptions to undermine children's believability.

Reliability of Forensic Interview with Child Victim of Sexual Abuse in Turkey

In cases of child sexual abuse, sometimes the only evidence may be the statement of the victim child. It is only recent phenomenon in Turkey that forensic interviews with child victims of sexual abuse prioritize the child victims and they are administered in a careful and delicate way that would not cause secondary traumatization, and they are conducted by professionals educated. Child advocacy centers and forensic interview rooms are formations where forensic interviews are conducted with children who are victims of sexual abuse. In this article, credibility of forensic interviews conducted with sexually abused child victims are covered on the basis of practices in child advocacy centers. From this point of view, the place of child abuse in Turkish law, institutional practices on this issue and the importance of coordination among institutions are mentioned. Subsequently, the importance of forensic interview for the investigation conducted with the child is explained, and basis components of the forensic interview process are listed. Afterwards, the characteristics of widely used protocols for forensic interviews in the world are mentioned and the credibility of victim’s statement effect and elements affecting the trustworthiness are touched upon. Last, the failures experienced in the system which includes forensic interviews in Turkey and suggestions to remedy these are assessed. Forensic interview should be done within the framework of a joint meeting protocol, increasing the frequency of forensic interviewer supervision training and making it compulsory, public prosecutor, judge, law enforcement officer and professionals working in the child protection system should also participate in the training of forensic interview with the child and consideration of all factors in the credibility evaluation of the forensic interview has been the suggestions conveyed in the light of the relevant literature.

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.

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.