首页> 外文OA文献 >A Qualitative Examination of “Ground Rules” Implementation Practice in Investigative Interviews with Children
【2h】

A Qualitative Examination of “Ground Rules” Implementation Practice in Investigative Interviews with Children

机译:对儿童调查访谈中“基本规则”实施实践的定性考察

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

There are specific guidelines for forensic interviews with children [for example, Crown Prosecution Service. (2011). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures. London: Crown Prosecution Service]. Such guidelines include a set of “ground rules” – these are procedures that should be followed at the start of an interview to explain the nature of the interview to a child and to ensure that evidence is obtained in a legally appropriate way. The procedures are also used as a way to demonstrate how well a child understands aspects of the interview. This study investigated how ground rules were implemented in 51 investigative interviews with child witnesses and victims alleging criminal activities. The results showed that there was a lack of consistency in ground rule implementation, and that even when ground rules were implemented, their relevance to the remainder of the interview was not made clear. These findings highlight concerns as to the efficacy of ground rule implementation practices.
机译:有针对儿童进行法医采访的特定准则(例如,皇家检察署。 (2011)。在刑事诉讼中获得最佳证据:采访受害者和证人的指南以及使用特殊措施的指南。伦敦:皇家检察署]。这些准则包括一套“基本规则”,这些规则是在访谈开始时应遵循的程序,以向儿童解释访谈的性质并确保以合法的方式获得证据。这些程序还可以用来证明孩子对面试各方面的理解程度。这项研究调查了在对涉嫌犯罪活动的儿童证人和受害者进行的51次调查性访谈中如何实施基本规则。结果表明,基本规则的实施缺乏一致性,即使基本规则得到实施,它们与面试其余部分的相关性也不清楚。这些发现突出表明了对基本规则实施实践的有效性的担忧。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号