I read an article today which has led me to question, is our judicial system being bad?Children are cross examined in a room which is separate from the court room or the interview is recorded and played back at a later date. However, in this case a four year old had to give details of a sex attack and demonstrate with the use of dolls. Why do we place our children in such a traumatic situation when they have suffered psychologically already? Surely with all our technology there is a much child friendlier procedure to hear the evidence. I feel that we are frightening our children into silence rather than telling the truth. Should the system be protecting the victims of crime, not encouraging them to re-live the trauma. This young girl was placed in a room for 40 minutes and questioned by lawyers she had never met before.
The defense council's point of view is: that they have to interview the victim but are unsure if this correct procedure to obtain the truth from children at such a young age. Even the police question if this form of cross-examination is appropriate for children at such a young age.
The Daily Mail on Sunday, May 3rd 2009. Article by Johnathon Petre, p16-17.
Hearing a child relive the crime is a device used by the prosecutor to appeal to the jury on an emotive and sympathetic level. Instead of hearing somebody read the cold facts of evidence, it is much more difficult for a jury to hear this come from a child’s mouth. So, yes it is unfair for a child to be put through the trauma of reliving a crime committed against or in front of them but there are always social workers present whose job it is to protect the child and if this results in longer sentences to criminals who hurt children, it is worth it.
ReplyDelete