The training involves encouraging children to

This preview shows page 6 - 8 out of 8 pages.

The training involves encouraging children to response untruthfully. For instance, if the children responded a ‘don’t know’, the interviewer will restate the response. Interviewers restating the children’s response is evidential as it once again later stated by Sim, indicating that “Out of 161 interviews, 68 involved distortions, and of these almost two-thirds were uncorrected by the child”. (Sim, 1999). Subsequently, due to interviewers twisting and restating children’s responses, children are known as an unreliable source. Children response would not be heard, instead the interviewers voice will be heard. With interviewers adding inaccurate information and restating children’s evidence, children will therefore be seen as an unreliable source if the interviewer’s information do not add up. This situation is highly dangerous and frightening for the child as they are highly afraid to speak the truth and they may not know how significant their evidence is in a case. Also, how significant it is for the evidence that they are providing to be accurate (Sim, 1999). In order to fix this situation, adult should be interviewed instead as they have would have a greater power to stand up for themselves and speak the truth. As well as correcting the interviewer if they add any inaccurate information’s. Whereas children on the other hand, they would be too afraid to stand up to correct the interviewer. This is evidential as it was stated by Lavarach stating that a child’s thoughts and comment are less reliable than an adult. 6
Finally, to conclude the essay, children are living in a community or environment where they have to accept what an adult declares. What an adult state could be a lie, so children will have to accept the lies. Misinterpreting and confusing questions will highly affect the children in order to answer the questions, and children responses will be unclear. Lastly, children will accept any questions asked and it all comes down to their lack of understanding English and their condition. Due to these reason, cultural background differences and disabilities are the main causes. Therefore, with relevant points and arguments provided using several empirical sources used as evidence, it is evidential to state that children do not provide a clear eyewitness testimony. 7
Reference 1) Lavarach, M. (1999). Australian law Reform Commissions: 14. Children’s evidence, page 160-173. Retrieved from . pdf 2) McWilliams, K. E. (2014). Parent-child discussion and children's eyewitness memory (Order No. 3646347). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1639700762). Retrieved from ? accountid=14543 3) Sim (1999). How reliable are child eyewitness? Vol. 12,iss 4. Retrieved from com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/211796678/fulltext/C3A7141115C64A3BP Q/1?accountid=14543 4) Sutherland, Rachel 1; Gross, Julien 1; Hayne, Harlene. (1996). Journal of Applied Psychology: Adults Understanding of Young Children’s Testimony. Volume 81 (6), p 777–785. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.777. Retrieved from - com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/article/00004565-199612000-00013/HTML 5) Thomson (1999). Reliability and Credibility of Children as Witnesses. Retrieved from - thomson.pdf 8

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture