The Supreme Court, Hearsay, and Crawford: Implications for Child Interviewers
Thomas D. Lyon
University of Southern California - Gould School of Law; University of Southern California - Department of Psychology
APSAC (American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children), Vol. 20, p. 2, 2008
USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 09-18
The purpose of this article is to explain the implications of Crawford for child interviewing. The bottom line is that interviewers should remain committed to best practice; that is, they should continue to pursue approaches that increase the accuracy and completeness of children's reports. It would be a mistake, for example, to stop videotaping interviews in the hopes that this would render interviews non-testimonial. As for prosecutors, Crawford suggests that greater efforts should be made to enable children to testify at trial. In this article, I will briefly review the research on best practices in interviewing, discuss Crawford and the limits it places on testimonial hearsay, and explain how interviewers and prosecutors should best respond.
Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 14, 2009 ; Last revised: June 22, 2009
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.313 seconds