Children's Allegations of Sexual Abuse in Criminal Trials: Assessing Defense Attacks on Credibility and Identifying Effective Prosecution Methods, Maricopa County, Arizona, 2005-2015

Child maltreatment is widely recognized as a severe crisis in the United States (Norman, Byambaa, Butchart, Scott, & Vos, 2012), incurring costs of $124 billion annually (Fang, Brown, Florence, & Mercy, 2012). Accordingly, children in the United States are frequently called to testify in criminal proceedings about their allegations (Hamblen & Levine, 1997). To effectively develop procedures that better distinguish true from false allegations, one must be equally concerned about false convictions and false acquittals; assessing best practices that minimize children's vulnerabilities and maximize competencies. To do so, the justice system must assess whether children are credible. As such, is necessary for the prosecutor to establish children's credibility, particularly by preempting or rebuffing concerns from the defense. Further, it is necessary for the defense to evaluate whether children's allegations are honest or suggestively influenced, productive, consistent and plausible. However, it is undetermined how to do this effectively. The purpose of the present investigation is to assess how children's credibility is established and questioned in courtroom investigations of sexual abuse allegations, with a particular focus on how children respond. It is expected that: 1) defense attorneys will use likely use subtle means to attack children's honesty and suggestibility, whereas prosecutors will ask overtly about such topics, 2) children will exhibit productivity differences depending on the questioner, 3) defense attorneys will frequently ask children specific questions about prior inconsistencies, 4) prosecutors will infrequently establish the plausibility of abuse, 5) prosecutors will infrequently preempt defense attorneys' concerns of credibility, and will only sometimes rebuff their attacks during re-direct examination, 6) both prosecutors and defense attorneys may ask developmentally inappropriate questions, and that 7) case characteristics will be related to questioning patterns. The proposed investigation will: develop an understanding of current prosecution and defense methods in cases involving allegations of child sexual abuse, contribute to prosecutors' abilities to effectively try such cases, providing concrete recommendations for defense attorneys when assessing children's credibility, and facilitate better decision making in cases of alleged child sexual abuse.

儿童虐待（Child maltreatment）在美国被广泛认为是一场严峻的公共危机（Norman等，2012），每年造成的经济损失高达1240亿美元（Fang、Brown、Florence及Mercy，2012）。有鉴于此，美国儿童常被传唤至刑事诉讼程序中就其所提出的指控作证（Hamblen与Levine，1997）。为有效制定可更好区分真实与虚假指控的程序，研究者需同时关注误判有罪与误判无罪两种情形，并评估能够最大限度降低儿童易受伤害性、最大化其作证能力的最佳实践方案。而要实现这一点，司法系统必须对儿童的证言可信度进行评估。据此，检察官有必要确立儿童证言的可信度，尤其需通过预先回应或驳斥辩方的质疑来达成这一目标。此外，辩方也有必要评估儿童的指控是否真实可信、是否受到暗示性影响、是否具有陈述内容的丰富性、是否前后一致且合乎情理。然而，目前尚未明确如何高效达成上述目标。本研究旨在评估在性侵指控的法庭调查中，儿童证言的可信度是如何被确立与质疑的，并重点关注儿童的应答表现。本研究提出以下预期假设：1）辩方律师将大概率采用隐晦手段攻击儿童证言的真实性与易受暗示性，而检察官则会就此类议题进行公开质询；2）儿童的陈述内容丰富性会因质询主体的不同而存在差异；3）辩方律师会频繁就儿童先前陈述中的矛盾之处向其提出针对性问题；4）检察官极少会就性侵指控的合理性进行举证；5）检察官极少会预先回应辩方对儿童证言可信度的质疑，且仅会在交叉询问后的复讯环节中偶尔驳斥辩方的攻击；6）控辩双方均可能提出不符合儿童发展阶段的问题；7）案件特征与质询模式存在相关性。本拟开展的研究将达成以下目标：其一，加深对性侵指控案件中控辩双方当前质证方法的认知；其二，提升检察官有效审理此类案件的能力，为辩方评估儿童证言可信度提供具体可行的建议；其三，助力性侵指控案件中决策质量的优化。