Judicial Assessment of the Credibility of Child Witnesses

Abstract

This article reports on the results of two research studies carried out by the authors that address the questions of how and how well judges assess the honesty and reliability of children's testimony. One study tested the accuracy of judges and other professionals in assessing the honesty of children giving mock testimony. Judges performed at only slightly above chance levels, though the performance of judges was comparable to other justice system professionals, and significantly better than the performance of law students. The second study, a survey of Canadian judges about their perceptions of child witnesses, reveals that judges believe that compared to adults, children are generally more likely when testifying to make errors due to limitations of their memory or communication skills and due to the effects of suggestive questions. However, children are perceived to generally be more honest than adult witnesses. The survey also revealed that judges believe that children are often asked developmentally inappropriate questions in court, especially by defence counsel. There were no gender differences among the judges in either study. To put this research in context, the article first discusses the inherent challenges in assessing the credibility of witnesses and provides a review of the psychological literature and leading Canadian jurisprudence on the credibility and evidence of children.

Young children can tell strategic lies after committing a transgression

“…If children are less inclined to tell lies in the Absent and Bluff conditions than in the Present and Informant conditions, it would suggest that young children are able to tell first-level strategic lies, supporting Darwin's original observation. In contrast, if children tell lies at similar rates in both the Absent/Bluff and Present/ Informant conditions, it would suggest that young children tell lies indiscriminately and are incapable of making strategic decisions to lie (Bala et al, 2005;Stern & Stern, 1909).…”

“…http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.04.003 even at 2.5 years of age children are motivated and will attempt to tell strategic lies to cover up their transgressions, a phenomenon Darwin called ''planned deceit''. In contrast, some psychologists (e.g., Stern & Stern, 1909) and professionals (e.g., judges, social workers, psychologists) have argued that young children are incapable of strategic lying (see Bala, Ramakrishnan, Lindsay, & Lee, 2005).…”

The Effects of Repetition on Children's True and False Reports

“…Additionally, previous studies have demonstrated that experience with children, or with lie-telling in general, does not appear to impact upon lie detection rates as teachers, police officers, lawyers, and social workers do not perform significantly above chance levels (Bala et al, 2005, Bond & DePaulo, 2008; Ekman & O’Sullivan, 1991; Leach et al, 2004; Strömwall et al, 2007; Vrij, 2005). Adults have difficulty seeing through children’s deceptive strategies (Strömwell et al, 2007), which has significant implications for the court system.…”

“…Extensive research has established that adults tend to be highly inaccurate and rarely above chance levels at differentiating between 3- and 16-year-olds’ true and deceptive statements (Bala et al, 2005; Crossman & Lewis, 2006; Edelstein, Luten, Ekman, & Goodman, 2006; Leach, Talwar, Lee, Bala, & Lindsay, 2004; Leach et al, 2009; Orcutt et al, 2001; Strömwall, Bengtsson, Leander, & Granhag, 2004; Strömwall, Granhag, & Landstrom, 2007; Talwar & Lee, 2002; Talwar et al, 2006; Tye et al, 1999; Vrij et al, 2006). Additionally, previous studies have demonstrated that experience with children, or with lie-telling in general, does not appear to impact upon lie detection rates as teachers, police officers, lawyers, and social workers do not perform significantly above chance levels (Bala et al, 2005, Bond & DePaulo, 2008; Ekman & O’Sullivan, 1991; Leach et al, 2004; Strömwall et al, 2007; Vrij, 2005).…”

“…However, studies have also revealed that children can be coached to tell convincing fabricated reports or to maintain secrets (Lyon, Malloy, Quas, & Talwar, 2008; Orcutt, Goodman, Tobey, Batterman-Faunce, & Thomas, 2001; Pipe & Wilson, 1994; Talwar, Lee, Bala, & Lindsay, 2006; Tye, Amato, Honts, Devitt, & Peters, 1999; Vrij, Akehurst, Brown, & Mann, 2006). As a result of continued concern regarding children’s ability to produce reliable reports (Bala, Ramakrishnan, Lindsay, & Lee, 2005), veracity detection has received increased attention in recent years.…”