One step forward and two steps back? The ‘20 Principles’ for questioning vulnerable witnesses and the lack of an evidence-based approach

Abstract

It is a widely held belief that questioning vulnerable witnesses is a specialist skill. In England and Wales vulnerable witness advocacy training built around ‘20 Principles’ has been developed and is being delivered. The 20 Principles do not cite a tested theoretical framework(s) or empirical evidence in support. This paper considers whether the 20 Principles are underpinned by research evidence. It is submitted that advocacy training and the approach to questioning witnesses in the courtroom should take into account the already available research evidence. The authors make recommendations for revision of the training and for a wider review of the approach taken to the handling of witness evidence.

Keywords

advocacy questioning training vulnerable witnesses

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbe

Brandon

(2014) Building and maintaining rapport in investigative interviews. Police Practice and Research 15(3): 207–220.

Ahern

Stolzenberg

Lyon

(2015) Do prosecutors use interview instructions or build rapport with child witnesses? Behavioural Sciences and the Law. 33(4): 367–594.

ATC (2011) Raising the Bar. London: ATC.

Bowler

Gardiner

Grice

(2000) Episodic memory and remembering in adults with Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 30(4): 295–304.

Bowles

Sharman

(2014) A review of the impact of different types of leading interview questions on child and adult witnesses with intellectual disabilities. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 21(2): 205–217.

Bruck

Ceci

Francoeur

Barr

(1995) I hardly cried when I got my shot! Influencing children’s reports about a visit to their paediatrician. Child Development 66(1): 193–208.

Bull

(2010) The investigative interviewing of children and other vulnerable witnesses: Psychological research and working/professional practice. Legal and Criminological Psychology 15(1): 5–23.

Ceci

Bruck

(1995) Jeopardy in the Courtroom: A Scientific Analysis of Children’s Testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Collins

Lincoln

Frank (2002) The effect of rapport in forensic interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 9(1): 69–78.

10.

Cooper

(2014) Highs and Lows: The 4th Intermediary Survey. Project Report. Kingston upon Thames: Kingston University.

11.

Cooper

(2017) Moving the Bar: Is cross-examination any good? Mental Capacity Report: Practice and Procedure 74: 3–6.

12.

Cooper

(2018) Participation of vulnerable people: Don’t expect fireworks. Family Law 48(Jan): 3.

13.

Cooper

Farrugia

(2017) Ground rules hearings. In: Cooper

Norton

(eds) Vulnerable People and the Criminal Justice System: A Guide to Law and Practice. Oxford: OUP.

14.

Cooper

Mattison

(2017) Intermediaries, vulnerable people and the quality of evidence: An international comparison of three versions of the English intermediary model. International Journal of Evidence and Proof 21(4): 351–370.

15.

Cooper

Mattison

(2018) ‘Section 28’ and the pre-recording of cross-examination. Criminal Law and Justice Weekly 182(1). Available at: www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/"Section-28"-and-Pre-Recording-Cross-Examination (accessed 9 February 2018).

16.

Cooper

Norton

(eds) (2017) Vulnerable People and the Criminal Justice System: A Guide to Law and Practice. Oxford: OUP, 415.

17.

Cooper

Wurtzel

(2013). A day late and a dollar short: In search of an intermediary scheme for vulnerable defendants in England and Wales. Criminal Law Review 2013(1): 4–22.

18.

Cooper

Wurtzel

(2014). Better the second time around? Department of Justice Registered Intermediaries Schemes and lessons from England and Wales. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 65(1): 39–61.

19.

Cooper

Backen

Marchant

(2015) Getting to grips with Ground Rules Hearings—a checklist for judges, advocates and intermediaries. Criminal Law Review 2015(6): 420–435.

20.

CPS (2018) Speaking to Witnesses at Court: CPS Guidance. London: CPS.

21.

Criminal Law Review (2018) R v Dinc (Zafer) (Case Comment) Criminal Law Review 2018(3): 263–266.

22.

Dando

(2013) Drawing to remember: External support of older adults’ eyewitness performance. PloS One 8: e69937.

23.

Dando

Ormerod

Wilcock

Milne

(2011) Change temporal order retrieval: Help or hindrance? Cognition 121(3): 416–421.

24.

Cann R

(1964) (rev. ed. 1993) The Art of the Advocate. London: Penguin.

25.

Evans

Meissner

Brandon

Russano

Kleinman

(2010) Criminal versus HUMINT interrogations: The importance of psychological science to improving interrogative practice. The Journal of Psychiatry and Law 38(1–2): 215–249.

26.

Fairclough

(2018) Speaking up for injustice: Reconsidering the provision of special measures through the lens of inequality. Criminal Law Review 2018(1): 4–19.

27.

Fisher

(2010) Interviewing cooperative witnesses. Legal and Criminological Psychology 15(1): 25–38.

28.

Fisher

Geiselman

(2010) The cognitive interview method of conducting police interviews: Eliciting extensive information and promoting therapeutic jurisprudence. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 33(5–6): 321–328.

29.

Gibbs

(2018) The battle is won and lost before the court doors are unlocked. Transform Justice, 6 July. Available at: www.transformjustice.org.uk/the-battle-is-won-and-lost-before-the-court-doors-are-unlocked/ (accessed 12 July 2018).

30.

Gray

(1991) Foreword. In: Munkman J (1991) (reprinted 2017) The Technique of Advocacy. London: Butterworths Lexis Nexis, v.

31.

Green

(2016) Introduction. In: Cooper

Hunting

(eds) Addressing Vulnerability in Justice Systems. London: Wildy, xiii.

32.

Haddon-Cave

(2011) Foreword. Raising the Bar. London: ATC, 2. Available at https://icca.ac.uk/images/download/advocacy-and-the-vulnerable/raising-the-bar.pdf (accessed 18 March 2018).

33.

Hallett

(2017) Foreword. In: Cooper

Norton

(eds) Vulnerable People and the Criminal Justice System. Oxford: OUP.

34.

Henderson

(2017) Taking control of cross-examination: Judges, advocates and intermediaries discuss judicial management of the cross-examination of vulnerable people. Criminal Law Review 2016(3): 181–205.

35.

Herschkowitz

(2011) Rapport building in investigative interviews of children. In: Lamb

La Rooy

Malloy

Katz

(eds) Children’s Testimony: A Handbook of Psychological Research and Forensic Practice. Chichester: Wiley, 109–128.

36.

Hershkowitz

Lamb

Katz

Malloy

(2015) Does enhanced rapport-building alter the dynamics of investigative interviews with suspected victims of intra-familial abuse? Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology 30(1): 6–14.

37.

Home Office (1998) Speaking Up for Justice. The Report of the Home Office Interdepartmental Working Group on the Treatment of Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System. London: Home Office.

38.

Howe

Knott

(2015) The fallibility of memory in judicial processes: Lessons from the past and their modern consequences. Memory 23(5): 633–656.

39.

Hunter

Jacobson

Kirby

(2018) Judicial Perceptions of the Quality of Criminal Advocacy. London: ICPR/SRA. Available at: www.sra.org.uk/sra/how-we-work/reports/criminal-advocacy.page (accessed 12 July 2018).

40.

Jacobson

(2017) Introduction. In: Cooper

Norton

(eds) Vulnerable People and the Criminal Justice System: A Guide to Law and Practice. Oxford: OUP, 2–3.

41.

Judiciary of England and Wales (2018) Better Case Management Handbook. Available at: www.judiciary.gov.uk/publications/the-better-case-management-bcm-handbook/ (accessed 5 May 2018).

42.

Keane

Fortson

(2011) Leading questions—a critical analysis. Criminal Law Review 2011(4): 280–295.

43.

Kelly

Miller

Redlich

Kleinman

(2013) A taxonomy of interrogation methods. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 19(2): 165–178.

44.

Koriat

Goldsmith

Pansky

(2000) Toward a psychology of memory accuracy. Annual Review of Psychology 51(1): 481–537.

45.

Krähenbühl

(2012) Does the jury really need to hear it all? The effect of evidence presentation practice on jury assessment of children’s eyewitness testimony. Psychology, Crime and Law 18(9): 847–858.

46.

Lyon

Wandrey

Ahern

Licht

Sim

Quas

(2014) Eliciting maltreated and non-maltreated children’s transgression disclosures: Narrative practice rapport building and a putative confession. Child Development 85(4): 1756–1769.

47.

Ministry of Justice (2011) Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, and Guidance on Using Special Measures. London: Ministry of Justice.

48.

Morley

(2015) The Devil’s Advocate. London: Sweet & Maxwell.

49.

Munkman

(1991) (reprinted 2017) The Technique of Advocacy. London: Butterworths Lexis Nexis.

50.

Otgaar

Howe

Merckelbach

Muris

(2018) Who is the better eyewitness? Adults and children. Current Directions in Psychological Science.

51.

Polyn

Norman

Kahana

(2009) Task context and organization in free recall. Neuropsychologia 47(11): 2158–2163.

52.

Roberts

Lamb

Sternberg

(2004) The effects of rapport-building style on children’s reports of a staged event. Applied Cognitive Psychology 18(2): 189–202.

53.

Solicitors Regulation Authority (2018) Criminal Advocacy Thematic Review. Birmingham: SRA. Available at: www.sra.org.uk/sra/how-we-work/reports/criminal-advocacy.page (accessed 12 July 2018).

54.

Smith

Milne

(2011) Planning the interview. In: Lamb

La Rooy

Katz

Malloy

(eds) Children’s Testimony: A Handbook of Psychological Research and Forensic Practice. Chichester: Wiley, 87–107.

55.

Smith

Milne

(2017) Vulnerable witnesses: The investigation stage. In: Norton

Cooper

(eds) Vulnerable People and the Criminal Justice System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

56.

Teoh

Lamb

(2010) Preparing children for investigative interviews: Rapport-building, instruction, and evaluation. Applied Developmental Science 14(3): 154–163.

57.

Vallano

Compo

(2011) A comfortable witness is a good witness: Rapport-building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock-crime interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology 25(6): 960–970.

58.

Walsh

Bull

(2012) Examining rapport in investigative interviews with suspects: Does its building and maintenance work? Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology 27(1): 73–84.

59.

Walters

(2017) Quality scheme for criminal advocates finally abandoned. The Law Society Gazette, 29 November. Available at: www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/quality-scheme-for-criminal-advocates-finally-abandoned/5063900.article (accessed 13 July 2018).

60.

Wellman

(1905) The Art of Cross-examination. London: Macmillan.

61.

Wood

(2016) Evolving advocacy training. Counsel June. Available at www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/evolving-advocacy-training (accessed 18 March 2018).

62.

Zajac (2009) Investigative interviewing in the courtroom: Child witnesses under cross-examination. In: Bull

Valentine

Williamson

(eds) Handbook of Psychology and Investigative Interviewing. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

63.

Zajac

O’Neill

Hayne

(2012) Disorder in the courtroom? Child witnesses under cross-examination. Developmental Review 32(3): 181–204.