Child witnesses: from witch hunts to testimonial aids.

• Date: 01 January 2009
• Author: Connolly, Deborah A.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Between June and September of 1692 in Salem Massachusetts, a group of young girls served as the primary eyewitnesses in over 20 criminal trials. The children, who ranged in age from 5 to 16 years, reported, among other things, having seen the defendants flying on broomsticks and instructing insects to fly into their stomachs to deposit nails and pins. Their testimonies were accepted by the court and 19 persons were put to death. (1) Contrast this illustration with a case involving a 3-year-old girl who was abducted, sexually assaulted, and left for dead. As corroborated independently by the perpetrator, the young girl was consistently accurate in her identification of the perpetrator, his vehicle, and activities that occurred. She maintained her story across multiple interviews and identifications of the suspect, including rejecting line-ups in which the suspect was not present (Jones & Krugman, 1986).

These examples illustrate children's vulnerabilities, their impressive memory abilities, and the consequences of both. During the Salem Witch Trials, 19 persons were put to death and dozens were incarcerated. In the case of the 3-year-old child, a heinous criminal was arrested and incarcerated so that he could not harm another child. Unfortunately, until the 1980s, perceptions of child witnesses focused more on children's vulnerabilities than their strengths. Consequently, children were functionally, if not formally, excluded from testifying in criminal courts. We briefly describe the law before the mid 1980s and survey legal changes from the past 25 years that have facilitated child participation in court. Most children who testify in criminal court do so as victims of abuse, commonly sexual abuse. Accordingly, we use sexual abuse prosecutions to illustrate our argument.

Before 1982, only the most resolute and committed prosecutor would have proceeded with a sexual assault case where the only evidence was the testimony of a child. There were three primary obstacles to successful prosecution.

* First, the Recent Complaint Doctrine stated that if a victim of sexual assault did not complain at the first opportunity after the assault, the trier of fact was required to draw an adverse inference with respect to credibility or consent. We know now that most child victims of sexual assault delay disclosing their victimization, often for a substantial period of time (London, Bruck, Ceci, & Shuman, 2005).

* Second, until 1988...