A study led by a Charles Sturt University (CSU) academic, thought to be the first of its kind, suggests that the way in which prosecutors and judges use expert evidence and judicial directions can help to dispel juror misconceptions and enhance juror perceptions of the credibility of a child witness in child sexual assault cases.

“At this stage it would be premature to extend the results to Australian jurors. Future studies should test the reliability and validity of the child sexual assault Misconceptions Questionnaire. Whether the credibility determinations so central in child sex abuse cases can be reliably modified by the proposed interventions needs to be tested using more realistic, externally valid case materials, such as a video-trial, in which mock jurors have an opportunity to observe the demeanour of a child, because the mode of presentation of child-witness testimony may be crucial in child sex abuse cases.”

ends

Media Note:

The study, Enhancing the Credibility of Complainants in Child Sexual Assault Trials: the Effect of Expert Evidence and Judicial Directions, by Professor Jane Goodman-Delahunty, Associate Professor Anne Cossins, School of Law at the University of New South Wales, and Ms Kate O’Brien, School of Psychology and Psychiatry, Monash University, is published online in Behavioural Sciences and the Law, in Wiley Online Library, October 2010.