Australian stakeholders' views on improving investigative interviews with adult sexual assault complainants

Investigating sexual assault is one of the most challenging tasks in modern-day policing. Because investigators must rely largely on the account provided by the complainant to establish whether or not a criminal offence has occurred, the way in which these accounts are elicited becomes paramount. Although there is a strong empirical consensus on how to maximise the completeness and accuracy of eyewitness accounts, several researchers have suggested modifying adult sexual assault interview protocols to better satisfy investigative and evidential needs and to provide complainants with a greater level of emotional support. This article explores professional stakeholders' views on what form these changes might take, and identifies the broad themes that drive these views.

Similarities in modi operandi of institutional and non-institutional child sexual offending: Systematic case comparisons

Little is known about the extent to whichinstitutional child sex offending differs from non-institutional offending. Strategies to secure the compliance of child victims were systematically compared to compare the modi operandi (prior to, during and following abuse), and the type of power (intimate, aggressive, coercive) applied by child sexual offenders in institutional versus non-institutional settings. A sample of 59 of the most recent child sexual abuse cases referred for prosecution in three Australian states was manually reviewed and coded. Of these, six were cases of institutional abuse, one of which involved crossover offending. Based on complainant age and gender and patterns in offending behaviors, institutional cases were matched with cases of non-institutional abuse. Complainants of both genders ranged in age from 5 to 16 years at abuse onset. Offenders were male family members or friends, priests, an employer and one female school teacher. Results demonstrated commonalities in the modi operandi and grooming methods applied in institutional and non-institutional contexts. Implications for abuse prevention are summarized.

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.

Want a Better Criminal Justice Response to Rape? Improve Police Interviews With Complainants and Suspects

Achieving just outcomes in rape cases is difficult, but there are ways we can improve the investigation and prosecution of these crimes, now. We outline how targeting variables, within control of the criminal justice system, can improve the quality of information police obtain from interviews with complainants and suspects. We explore how, by preserving these accounts on video, the criminal justice process can better use this information to improve effective decision making from investigation through to criminal trial through to prevention.