Developing an objective approach to assessing allegations of sexual abuse

Abstract

The decision to prosecute in a case of alleged child sexual abuse is a function of whether it is in the child's and the public's interest and whether the case is likely to be successful. This in turn rests largely upon what the child says during a joint investigative interview, the adequacy of that interview in terms of whether it meets the necessary legal requirements and whether other evidence is available, and the weight given to it. This paper describes an approach to evaluating what a child says during the interview which has been used widely in Europe to aid the decision‐making process of teams and courts in their dealings with allegations of child sexual abuse. It is concluded that despite a number of methodological problems with the technique, known as statement validity analysis, joint investigating teams and the Crown Prosecution Service are likely to find it of assistance in clarifying their decision‐making concerning children's evidence and, in particular, whether it is likely to be sufficiently strong to succeed within our current legal framework.

The Detection of Dissimulation: Lies, Damned Lies and SVA

“…He describes the possible 'launching of a promising psychological technique into the legal arena' as potentially dangerous should it occur too soon (Iones, 1994, p. 102). Bradford (1994) also supports the technique in principle, but is clear that the methodological issues to be resolved include the scoring method and the degree of importance to be attached to the individual credibility criterion. The need for extensive empirical evaluation of the technique is also endorsed by Davies (1994), again with particular emphasis on the validating of scoring procedures.…”

“…SVA, according to Gudjonsson, is based upon a 'solid theoretical foundation and early validation of the technique IS promising' (Gudjonsson, 1994, p. 204). It IS possible to conclude, as Bradford (1994) does, that despite a number of methodological problems with SVA, it is likely, in due course, to be of assistance in determining which cases are strong enough to warrant putting before the courts. A major advantage of SVA is that valid judgments in respect of the veracity of accounts which are based on explicit criteria will aid decision-making.…”

“…The concern has been, in the main, about the possibility of children making false allegations based upon their inability to distinguish fact from fantasy. Studies suggest that fictitious allegations by children range from 2 per cent of cases (Mann, 1985) to 5 per cent (Spencer and Flin, 1990) and, in a small group of children referred for specialist evaluation, to 35 per cent (Bradford, 1994). It is, however, particularly difficult to determine objectively what constitutes a 'fictitious' report, given that the way in which children tell their story vanes significantly -as do the skills and styles of the interviewer.…”

“…Therefore, the presence of a number of the 18 identified criteria would indicate an experienced event. Bradford (1994) defmes a three-stage process: psychological assessment, analysis of the statement, and the application of a checklist.…”

Is it Possible to Establish the Truth of a Child's Statement Alleging Sexual Abuse?

“…But despite such promises, the overwhelming evidence points to the need for caution when considering this assessment. There have been recommendations for SVA to be used by child protection agencies, the Crown Prosecution Service and lawyers (Bradford, 1994). Such recommendations are hasty and likely to attract problems (Jones, 1994).…”