Inconsistencies in complainant\u27s accounts of child sexual abuse arising in their cross-examination

A key cross-examination tactic in trials of child sexual abuse (CSA) is to highlight inconsistencies between sources of information to discredit the complainant's account. The present study examined the prevalence, origin and nature of inconsistencies arising in the cross-examination of complainants in CSA trials. Further, we examined the association between these inconsistencies and the types of question that elicited them in the earlier police interview of the child witness (i.e. open-ended, specific, or leading). Transcripts of videorecorded interviews (evidence-in-chief) of 73 complainants (15 males, 58 females) and subsequent cross-examinations at trial were coded. Results showed that inconsistencies were raised in the cross-examination of 94.5% of complainants; most between what the children said in their police interview versus their cross-examination. A greater proportion of inconsistencies was associated with specific than open-ended questions asked in the police interview. However, open-ended questions were associated with some inconsistencies, perhaps due to the longer answers they elicited. Shorter police interviews relying mainly on open-ended questions may minimise the opportunity for inconsistencies to arise in cross-examinations. Judges and juries require education about inconsistencies that arise from memory's reconstructive nature and lay people's tendency to use these inconsistencies to make inferences about the unreliability of witnesses.No Full Tex

Student and supervisor perceptions of writing competencies for a Computer Science PhD

A PhD in any discipline requires a student to produce a substantial written document, which is then assessed by a group of experts in the specific discipline. In the discipline of computer science, it has often been noted anecdotally that many students struggle with the English writing skill needed to produce a thesis (and other documents, such as scientific papers). English writing skill issues seem particularly acute for students for whom English is not their first language, especially as undergraduate degrees in computer science generally do not require students to undertake significant amounts of English writing. In this project, we investigated the level of competence in written English that is appropriate for Australian PhD students enrolled in Computer Science. In particular, we sought to determine the appropriate level of writing skill required, how the level of skill may change during the students' candidature, and the reasons for this change, as perceived by both students and supervisors. We approached these questions by surveying both students and PhD supervisors from a variety of Australian universities, to determine both their perceptions of the writing skill requirements that are appropriate, difficulties encountered, and support services, in the context of the English language learning background of all participants. We also analysed the performance of students on a given writing task, which was assessed by experienced PhD Computer Science supervisors, English for Academic Purposes support staff and by an IELTS examiner. We found insufficient awareness of the writing supports available, a need for writing support targeted at technical writing, and an average supervisor expectation of IELTS 6.5 for writing at PhD commencement

Tracking labels for occurrences of alleged child abuse from police interviews to trials

Purpose Labelling (i.e., naming) individual occurrences of repeated abuse allegations with explicit and consistent terms may improve children's reporting of these offences. The aim of the present study was to track labels for occurrences of alleged child sexual abuse from the police interview to court proceedings. Methods We examined the labels used in the police interviews and trials of 23 child complainants (5–15 years old at interview). The initiator of each label (child, interviewer, lawyer, or judge), stage of the process in which the label was generated, and the type of information used to label specific occurrences of abuse were recorded. Any subsequent reuse or replacement of the labels was also recorded. Results Most labels were created by police interviewers. Few children generated labels. Most occurrences of abuse were labelled early in the legal process; 82% were first labelled either in the police interview or in the prosecution's opening statement. The labels were frequently replaced with alternate terms, with an average of three different labels for the same incident. After original labels were established for occurrences, they were just as likely to be replaced as they were to be reused. The most frequently observed label replacement was by defence lawyers during cross‐examination. Conclusions Labels were used inconsistently throughout the police interview and trial. To give children the best chance of describing specific occurrences of abuse during legal proceedings, labels should be created from children's words wherever possible and used consistently thereafter by all justice professionals.Full Tex