Australian prosecutors’ perceptions of the utility of child investigative interview protocols
| Date | 01 December 2015 |
| Published date | 01 December 2015 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461355715616958 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian prosecutors’ perceptions
of the utility of child investigative
interview protocols
Mairi S Benson
Centre for Investigative Interviewing, Deakin University, Australia
Martine B Powell
Centre for Investigative Interviewing, Deakin University, Australia
Abstract
Investigative interviews with alleged victims form the central plank of evidence in the prosecution of child sexual abuse.
Despite interviewers being provided with a guiding framework, child sexual abuse cases are often not prosecuted because
of poor-quality evidence. The purpose of this study was to elicit feedback from prosecutors about the structure and
format of current interview protocols and the ways in which these could potentially be improved from an evidential
perspective. Focus group discussions (ranging in length from 180 to 190 minutes) were conducted with 13 Crown
prosecutors representing every jurisdiction of Australia. Thematic analysis of the focus group discussions revealed that
prosecutors were supportive of the structure of interview protocols, however, concerns were raised about four of
the interview elements. These elements were the oath and truth–lie competency test, the ground rules, the practice
narrative and eliciting a disclosure. The prosecutors’ concerns and their implications for protocol developers and
trainers are discussed.
Keywords
Investigative interviewing, child witness, child sexual assault
Submitted 15 Jul 2015, accepted 18 Oct 2015
In cases of alleged sexual assault of a child, the investiga-
tive interview with the victim is central to the police inves-
tigation and prosecution processes. Even when the assault
is recent, there is usually an absence of physical and other
corroborative evidence and thus the child complainant’s
verbal account of what happened is the primary evidence
guiding professional decisions (Heger et al., 2002; Kellog
et al., 2004; Walsh et al., 2008). Indeed, in many jurisdic-
tions, the child complainant’s police interview (conducted
soon after the alleged abuse is reported) is audio-visually
recorded and played at the trial as the child’s evidence-
in-chief. For successful prosecution, the child victim’s
statement that forms the evidence-in-chief must be quite
detailed,including information thatidentifies both the nature
of the sexual actsalleged and the offender. Further,the state-
ment must provide sufficient particulars (i.e. details about
the timing, location or other contextual information that
distinguishes one offence from another) such that it is clear
which act forms the basis of each charge (Burrows and
Powell, 2014; Po dirsky v. R., 1990; Sv. R., 1989).
To assist investigators in eliciting the best possible state-
ments from child witnesses, interview protocols (i.e. guide-
lines related to the format of the interview and question
structure)have been developed. The creation of theseframe-
works has been led,in the most part, from the vantage point
of a single discipline – child developmental psychology (the
Corresponding author:
Martine Powell, School of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood
Hwy, Burwood, 3125, Victoria, Australia.
Email: martine.powell@deakin.edu.au
International Journalof
Police Science & Management
2015, Vol. 17(4) 216–229
ªThe Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1461355715616958
psm.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial