1 / 20

Investigative interviews of children in Estonia between 2004 and 2014

Investigative interviews of children in Estonia between 2004 and 2014. Kristjan Kask Tallinn University School of Natural Sciences and Health , The Centre of Excellence in Behavioural and Neural Sciences. Developments in Estonian legislation in recent years.

estrain
Download Presentation

Investigative interviews of children in Estonia between 2004 and 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Investigative interviews of children in Estonia between 2004 and 2014 Kristjan Kask Tallinn University School of Natural Sciences and Health, TheCentre of Excellence in Behavioural and NeuralSciences

  2. Developments in Estonian legislation in recent years • New Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) in 2004 • First videotaped interviews in 2004 • Changes in the CCP in 2011 concerning interviewing minors under the age of 14

  3. CCP § 70Specifications concerning hearing of witnesses who are minors •  1) A body conducting proceedings may involve a child protection official, social worker, teacher or psychologist in the hearing of a witness who is a minor.

  4. CCP § 70Specifications concerning hearing of witnesses who are minors • (2) If BCP has not received appropriate training, involvement of a child protection official, social worker, teacher or psychologist in the hearing of a minor is mandatory if: 1) the witness is up to ten years of age and repeated hearing may have a harmful effect on the mind of a minor; 2) the witness is up to fourteen years of age and the hearing is related to domestic violence or sexual abuse; 3) the witness is with speech impairments, sensory or learning disabilities or mental disorders.

  5. CCP § 70Specifications concerning hearing of witnesses who are minors •  (3) If necessary, the hearing of minors is video recorded. • /---/ if the intention is to use such hearing as evidence in court proceedingbecause hearing of a minor directly in a court is impossible due to his or her age or mental state. • (4) A suspect has the right to examineduring the pre-trial proceedings the video recordings /---/

  6. CCP § 2901Specifications concerning testimony given in pre-trial procedure by witnesses who are minors • (1) A court may not summon a minor at the request of a party to the court proceeding and allow to submit the testimony given by the minor in pre-trial procedure as evidence, provided the testimony was video recorded, and the counsel has had the opportunity to pose questions to the witness in pre-trial procedure about the facts relating to the subject of proof /---/

  7. Other regulation • The state prosecutor guideline from 2007 about special treatment of minors in criminal proceedings

  8. Thus: • Since 2012 unified nationwide 14-day trainings for investigators (n=16 per year) • NICHD Protocol (Lamb et al. 2008)

  9. Kask (2012) n=66, age 4-14, interviews 2004-2008 • Option-posing and direct questions were most frequently employed • Invitationsproduced significantly more information • As interviews progress, the proportion of general invitations per interview decrease as the number of suggestive and option-posing questions increase • Four to seven-year-old children were asked more suggestive questions than olderchildren

  10. Kask (2015) n=10, age 5-17, interviews 2011-2014

  11. Interviews in time • Johnson et al. (2015) • No change in the frequency of open-ended and suggestive questions askedover a 22-year perspective • Decreasing frequency of option-posing questions observed accompanied by an increasingfrequency of directive questions

  12. Present study • The aim of the present study was to examine the questioning styles employed in Estonian police interviews of child sexual and physical abuse cases between 2004 and 2014

  13. Limitations • Limited sample -> data protection issues • Professional development of interviewers unknown -> difficult to detect direct effect of training(s)

  14. Method • Videotaped interview transcriptions of 61 children (33 girls) • 2004-2005 n=17 • 2007-2011 n=32 • 2012-2014 n=12 • Mean age was 9 years 3 months (range 3.5 to 14 years) • Mean length 30 minutes (range 8 to 94 minutes)

  15. Method • 59 female, 2 male interviewers • 48 interviews in Estonian, 13 in Russian • 68% CSA cases • 54 male, 8 female suspects • Of the suspects: • 23 family members • 19 acquaintances • 19 strangers

  16. Results

  17. Question types - significant difference for invitations

  18. Multiple questions – ns

  19. Summary • A few changes over time (see also Johnson et al., 2015) • Effect of training?

  20. Thank you!Contact: kask@tlu.ee

More Related