NCJ Number
138013
Journal
Duke Law Journal Volume: 41 Issue: 3 Dated: (December 1991) Pages: 691-739
Date Published
1991
Length
49 pages
Annotation
This article discusses issues related to the development of court guidelines to be used in the determination of when expert evidence from an investigative interview should be admissible as evidence in a child sexual abuse prosecution.
Abstract
Part I discusses the major criticisms of the handling of child sexual abuse investigations and the danger of courts assuming that children are incapable of false accusations of sexual abuse. Part II discusses evidentiary and constitutional issues associated with child sexual abuse trials, such asthe admissibility of an expert's testimony concerning information gained from an abuse investigation. This discussion focuses on Idaho v. Wright (1990), the U.S. Supreme Court decision that provides guidelines for courts to follow when admitting hearsay testimony under the confrontation clause. Part III discusses recent social science studies that have evaluated the reliability of using anatomically detailed dolls to determine whether child sexual abuse has occurred, that have investigated children's suggestibility, and that have examined the incidence rate of false allegations of child sexual abuse. This part also addresses the common problems of abuse investigations, that is, problems of suggestibility, interviewer bias, and the pursuit of an agenda. Part IV considers how the research findings of Part III affect the evaluation process that courts must use before admitting expert opinion testimony in child sexual abuse prosecutions. Guidelines are provided for the determination of whether the investigation was conducted properly. 260 footnotes