Topic 6: Child Victims and witnesses

Child witness research thorugh the ages:

- 1900-1914

- 1915-1969

- 1970 and on

1. european focus on children suggestibility

2. finds accuracy ↑ w age (not much else happens)

3. resurgence...

- adults eyewitness research takes off

- bunch of high profile SA in Canada (+ satanic SA case allegations)

- change in treatment of child witnesses in court

how did treatment of child witnesses change in court

- dropped the corrobortation requirment

corroboration = anything the child said had to be backed up by an adult

dif bw free recall and direct quesitoninfg in children

free recall

- good, as accurate as adults

- may report little info (they need more promptinf but this can be risky)

direct quesitoning:

- yes/no qs r probabmatic bc they ofte just say yes

- difficutly w unanswerable questions

- how questions --> prod more info thatn why/direct/forced choice questions

chester the janitor study on interviewer tone (what was the study, what were the IV's, results, takeway)

kids watched chester come in room and clean toys

- then questioned about chester twice that day in...

1. accusatory tone "he plays all the time"

2. exculpatory tone "he was cleaning right"

3. neurtral tone

neutral tone = accurate recall

accusatory/exculpatory = kids often agree w questioner

**this inc when asked the second time

take away: Ambiguous events lead to children more often following the interviewer's lead!

*so Interviewer's beliefs and tone can influence recall.

simon says study on interrviewer beliefs affect

phase 1 - children get interviewed a month after simon says game with interviewers that have accurate and inaccurate info

3-4 yo's corroborate misiinformation. more than 5-6 uo

pgase 2 - Interviews' notes given to 2nd interviewer

Children re-interviewed 2 months later by 2nd interviewer

Children continue to:

1. Make errors consistent with the 1st interview's beliefs

2. Increase in confidence over time

3. Might be creating false memories?)

Takeaways of simonsays study

- younger children are more susceptable to misleading info

- if you are confident about an event but dont have physical evidence you shouldnt interview a child bc these strong expectations can come through in tone and quesiton asking

Park Rangers Study (Petit, Fagan & Howie, 1990) take home

Interviewer expectation influences questions and subsequent answer. --> bc kids tell the interviewer what they want to hear

Park rangers visit school and knock a cake on the floor 2 weeks later kids interviewed by an interviewer that is given:

Full accurate account

Inaccurate info

No information

Misled interviewer used 4-5 times as many misleading questions

Dale Study (Lepore & Sesco, 1994)

4-6 yo play a game with Dale, who asks them to take off his sweater

kids interviews in a neurtral and incriminating tone ("he wasnt supposed to do that"

the incriminating interviewer showed more errors

- they often agree w their bias suggestions

-!!! 1/3rd even go beyond the interviewers insinuations and come up with more false details (eg. touched other children)

Dale Study (Lepore & Sesco, 1994) take away

Takeaway: The first interviewer can strongly influence children's accounts by planting false information, which they can creat more false memories on, which can carry through the rest of an investigation.

Sam Stone Study on sterotype induction (Leichtman & Ceci, 1997)

Sam comes to school, visits the kids, says hello and then leaves

Stereotype induction: the interviewer said he was very clumsy but didnt do anything clumsy.

Remember when sam came to the scool and brok that you? How did he do that?

But he never broke a toy

Some kids say:

Same read a book while he was there

Said he threw books around the class

Kelly Michaels case

preschool teacher convicted of molecting 19 children in ver bizzare ways

She served 5 years then it got overturned because of questioning the reliability of the children's testimonies

what are the take hoem of all of these studies/cases

- children quickly pick up on interviewer tone

- children often agree w/ interviewer beleif

- repeeated questions implant detial n their head

- sterotype induction: when you frame a person through a specfic sterotype the child will view them through that lens (eg/ hes a bad guys, hes a clumsy guy)

What is a moral panic?

Intense concern in population about a social threat that is empirically unjustified

E.g., salem witch trials

Hostility toward "folk devils"

Disproportionate to actual risk

Volatile

what is satanic panic

moral panic about satanism in the 80's and 90's due to media at the time

- alos because this was the same time society was going from mothers always being home to now daycares becoming a thing and care of child going into the hands of another --> families fearing satanism in the daycares

Martensville (Saskatchewan) 1992 case

a innocent home preschool that recieve many allegations of SA on the children due to...

- improper child interviews

- satanic panic

*investigation began because a police officer mother notcies a rash on her child --> Sterling family & 5 other men charged with 190 counts

Manipulative nature of interviews eventually recognized

Charges eventually dropped, but reputation and finances ruined

what are the problems with satanic panic martensville case

- no physical evidence ofabuse

- kids said bizzare examples

- evidence was put on tv leafing parents to ask their kids leading questions

- repeated suggestive questions

- (leafing questions like "did they take u to a basement""were they weargin robes' lead to false memories and additional details of bizzare satanic secual abuse from kids )

John Poppowich

a vet officer accused of running a child sex ring with the martensville preschool

- charges were dropped

Sued the government

Got 1.2 million dollars

Defends male up for his reputation

Similar cases to the martensville in US

- Wee Care Nursery (1985) • Kelly Michaels accused of sexually abusing 20 children aged 3-5 with very bizzare allegations

- McMartin Preschool (1987)

Ray & Peggy Buckey charged with 207 counts of child molestation

- Little Rascals Daycare centre (1989)

7 adults accused of molesting 90 children

ALL W NO PHYSICAL OR MEDICAL EVIDENCE!

And they should've been given the children's reports

what were the common characteristics in the questoning used on children in these cases

1. repeated questioning (signals that previous ans was wrong, can induce false memory)

2. questiosn that suggest an event occured (did they take u to basement)

3. offering praise/reward for desired answers

4. get kids to speculate or imagine what coudl have happened (can lead to false memories - in adults too)

5. interviewers alr had strong beleifs that show in tone and questions ask

why are children suggestible

1. social compliance ( they want to cooperate w the interviewer, infer the desired response)

2. cognitive system differences (encode, store and retreive memories differently, can misattribute where info comes from)

Ceci & Bruck (1983) mouse trap study - effect of repeated questionsing

asked children about getting a finger caught in a mouse trap who didnt

25% created false memory of the event (by the 3rd time asking)

58% of preschoolers gave detailed descriptions

child problamatic questioning: peer pressure

- In cases w multiple victims

- When a child is strongly influenced to answer like their friends have,

normative pressure

Eg. "All the other kids told me everything and now its your turn to talk. You don't want to be left out, do you?"

They think they are just making the child more comfortable to share but in reality they may create false memories

lead to child falsely reporting the abuse to conform with the other kids

child Problematic questioning: power differential

- Kids are highly susceptible to status and power of the interviewer a

- Kids don't often correct an adult

- Will more often follow an adult's suggestions even if they believe/know the adult is wrong

Problematic Questioning: Stereotype Induction

when you frame a person through a specfic sterotype the child will view them through that lens (eg/ hes a bad guys, hes a clumsy guy)

Children will help build and elaborate on the bad guy narrative, may make accusations

"He's a bad guy"

Problematic Questioning: Interviewer Beliefs

The interviewer shouldn't have any knowledge or bias on the case - but obv might be difficul /impracticle

Can result in problematic questioning styles (e.g., repeated questioning, tone, misleading questions...)

Children provide narratives that align with the interviewer's beliefs

Anatomically detailed doll

- doll used to get reluctant kids to describe the sa that happened to them

but can be misused:

- shown to inc no. of false allegations bc they treat it like a toy

- foudn that body diagrams are better

Recommendations for Questioning Children (NICHR Interview Protocol) 10

1. avoid confirmatory biases

2. build rapport

3. encourage them to say as much in own words

4. ask open prompts for free recall

5. follow up w general questions

6. use specific question only with what the child has alr mentioned

7. express lack of knowledge for events (idk u tell me)

8. encourage child to correct ur mistakes

9. document details on how the childs statement was collected

10. videotape

Historical approaches to child witnesses

(1800, 1900, 1988, now)

1800 - children deemed unfit to testify

1900 - children can testify but must take oath (christian)

1988 - no corroboration needed, oath is more relaxed, but must pass competency inquiry

(= understand what truth telling is, consequence, lie etc.)

now - must promise to tell the truth

why did they drop the competency inquiry for child witnesses?

--> its based on this research:

the Child Witness Project: Bala & Lindsay

= a series of studies to asses a childs understanding of truth and lie vs acc truth telling

found:

- 75% of kids who cheated on the test denied it even tho they passed competency inquiry

- Understanding of truth-telling was not related to their behaviour

- Instead found Promise to tell the truth was more predictive of honesty!

what is the current test for children to be able to testify

(2006 -- Current Test: s.16(3) Canada Evidence Act )

- persons under 14 are presumed to ave capacity to testify

- test only so see if child can understand and respond to questions

- no oatt but must promise to tell truth

Lowers complexity & lowers the threshold required for competence (just be able to communicate)

In-court Accommodations for child testominies

1. Courtroom is closed to the public

2. Hearsay testimony permitted

Child can testifying about what someone else said)

3. Child testifies from another room via CCTV

So theyre arent actually facing the abuser

4. A screen separates the child and defendant

5. Pre-recorded video testimony

6. Child has a support person present

Even have support dogs in uk

4 types of child maltreatment

Physical abuse

Eg. shaking, choking, biting

Sexual abuse

Neglect/failure to provide

Emotional maltreatment

canadas rule on corporal punishment (hitting for discipline - where do we draw line)

is allowed in canada

You can hit on children 3 to 12, but may not use objects

Anything outside of that is considered physical abuse eg. a belt

This is still vague!! → is hitting them 20 times okay jsut because there wasnt an object

gov responsibility for child maltreatments

Gov has authority and responsibility to remove child from caregiver because of maltreatment or risk of

Also applies if caregiver is unwilling to prevent abuse by a third party

eg. mom w abbusive bf

Mandatory reporting act (2011) Canada -

Everyone is mandated to report suspected maltreatment

While teachers and healthcare providers are the obvious one so is the average joe - but unfortunately this isnt known info

eg.Requires that internet providers report suspected child pornography

Cyberbullying

using technology to harass threaten embarass or target someone

25% of candaian teens report being cyberbulied

Social media use > 3 hrs/day linked to higher depression & anxiety

Due to what their being exposed to

Also cases of cyberbullying or sextortion

what is sextortion

extorting money/sexual favors by threatening to reveal sexual behaviour

famous case:

Amanda Todd

- 1st high profile sextortion cases involving a minor in Canada

- died by suicide on 2012

- guilty: 40 yo faydin coban - found by anon hackers not cops

Bill C-63 (Online Harms Act) - child proteciton focus

force platforms to be accountable

- mandates removal of harmful content (eg. child sex exploitation, non consensual content) within 24 hrs

- Imposes fines up to 6% of global revenue on non- compliant platforms.

Child Protection Focus:

- Addresses content that sexually victimizes children or revictimizes survivors.

- Targets content used to bully children or induce self-harm.

- Mandates age-appropriate design features on platforms used by minors.

⚠ Potential Harms of Early Social Media Use

1. Cyberbullying & Public Shaming

2. Mental Health Risks

3. Exploitation & Privacy Risks (grooming, sharing pics, data tracking)

4. Algorithmic Amplification (Content designed to maximize engagement

Exposure to extreme or harmful material)

Audrie & Daisy

- 2 teenage girls SA'd a t a party

- Pictures and rumours quickly start spreading;

- get victims blamed, experience a lot of psychological distress

- Audrie died by suicide before the documentary; Daisy performed a lot of advocacy but also died by suicide years after

Age of 1st online stranger harassment experience (study on women)

mean and range

Mean = 15 yo

Range = 7-27

common characteristing of online stranger harrassment

1. early onset

2. rapid sexualization

3. persistance and escalation (eg. making multiple accounts)

sugar dadies

common stranger harassment experiences

Sugar daddies

Offering young girls money for sexual favours

Often with older men in 40s

Pornhub & Child exploitation scandal (2020)

investigators revealed child sexual abuse & non-consensual content on Pornhub → Bceause anyone can post on pronhub

what did they do to pornhub after the scandal

- Visa & MC suspended payment processing as a consequence

- Platform banned unverified users from uploading,

- removed download features for videos,

- implemented "stricter content verification"

Kidfluencers and risks

= Minors who create content on platforms like TikTok, Youtube, etc.

Often gain large audiences (include adults) & sponsorships, sometimes managed by parents or agencies

Risks?

Creeps online

Can get stalked

Pipeline to OF → Danielle bregoli, piper rockell

eg. wren elanor