This memorandum discusses the strategies courts employ around the world to treat child victims and witnesses and their evidence when giving testimony. International and regional human rights standards have highlighted good practices in the treatment of vulnerable young child witnesses, centering on the foundational principle of the best interests of the child.
This memorandum discusses the use of closed-circuit television (CCTV) in courtrooms for cases where there will be child testimony. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes recommends that children be allowed to give testimony through CCTV or another mechanism in order to prevent the child witness from being traumatized. Unfortunately, given the funding requirements, few countries have the facilities to use CCTV. Yet, a number of countries have statutes allowing for alternative mechanisms to prevent child victims from seeing the defendant while giving testimony.
Criminal Code C-46 provides mechanisms which make is easier for vulnerable persons such as female complainants to give testimony during criminal proceedings.
The prosecutor is appealing a ruling of not guilty in a sexual abuse case. The not guilty ruling had been based largely on inconsistencies between the initial testimony of the victim and her testimony at trial. This court found that, because the victim was not provided appropriate and comfortable conditions to give oral testimony (she was made to testify in front of a public audience and with the defendant in view), her testimony entailed a re-victimization, which influenced her ability to provide complete and accurate facts.
In Moore v. City of Leeds, 1 So. 3d 145 (Ala. Crim. App. 2008), the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed the admissibility of a domestic-violence victim’s statement made to her treating physician. The defendant had been convicted of third-degree domestic violence, harassment, and harassing communications after assaulting his ex-wife, Karen Kelly, during an altercation in a moving vehicle. At trial, the physician who treated Ms.
In Moti Lal v. State of M.P., the appellant raped a woman while she was guarding her husband’s agricultural field. The woman, a member of a Scheduled Caste, and her husband filed a police report.
The appellant was convicted of statutory rape of his daughter. The appellant claimed the rape had not happened because the daughter was not home, and that she was not a credible witness. The Supreme Court agreed with the findings and conclusion of the trial and appeals courts that rape was committed by the appellant. The Supreme Court noted that the testimony of a child-victim is to be given full weight and credence.
The appellant was convicted of two counts of statutory rape. The appellant sought to overturn the conviction on the ground that the victim’s testimony was riddled with inconsistencies.
