Culture, social knowledge, and the determination of criminal responsibility in children: Issues in justice for aboriginal youth

Abstract

This paper examines cultural and developmental issues in justice for child offenders with special reference to Aboriginal youth. Methods of interrogation during police interviews arc' considered as a means to prompt children to give compliant answers. Further, the social knowledge of children may differ lrom that of adults, particularly in situations where cultural minorities such a s Aborigines are involved. To illustrate. the case of an Aboriginal youth charged with the rape of his five-year-old cousin is discussed. The boy was given measures of social knowledge and the results wereentered asevidenceat the time ofsentence. In thiscontext, the rolc and prospects for psychological evidence on criminal responsibility in children are d iscussed.M y purpose in this paper is to examine issues in the assessment of criminal responsibility in children, with particular reference to Aboriginal youth. The aim is not to propose a welldeveloped theory of jurisprudence on the treatment of minority children. Rather, it is to raise issues in justice for Aboriginal youth concerning, first, methods of interrogation and, second, cultural influences on social knowledge and the motivations underlying children's behaviour. With regard to the legal framework and a Queensland case study, consideration is given to the current role and prospects for psychological evidence.Thanks are due to Kobyn Nugent and Yoshi Kashima for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. I am grateful to Susan Sheppard for her expertise and guidance on questions of law.Requests for reprints should be sent to Michael Siegal. for a more m n t discussion of this topic, see R. V. Condren (unreported Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment, no. 191 of 1984).

Beyond methodology: frequently asked questions on the significance of conversation for development

“…Conversational implications follow from such exchanges which are mutually understood by experienced speakers and listeners within a culture. As I have pointed out elsewhere (Siegal, 1988(Siegal, , 1997, this situation may occur where there is a dialogue between members of majority and disadvantaged minority groups or within collectivist societies in which it is mutually understood that there can be little correspondence between individual attitudes and behaviors owing to cultural traditions.…”

Concern for the conversational environment: Questioning children in custody disputes.

“…In this connection, children may answer in a fashion similar to powerless adults, such as Australian Aborigines when they are asked questions by legal authorities (cf. Siegal, 1988). Even if they hold strong convictions about their future, they may display strategies of "gratuitous compliance" and attempt to give assent to any alternative that the investigator expresses in the hope that the dispute wil I be solved without further pressure from authorities.…”

Children as eyewitnesses memory, suggestibility, and credibility

“…Cultural factors may play a significant role in determining the knowledge that children bring to conversations about legal matters and can provide a further impediment to an investigator's efforts at eliciting scientifically relevant evidence (cf. Siegal, 1988).…”