Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in cou...
View graph of relations

Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have?

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have? / Kebbell, M R ; Hatton, C ; Johnson, S D .

In: Legal and Criminological Psychology, Vol. 9, 02.2004, p. 23-35.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Kebbell, MR, Hatton, C & Johnson, SD 2004, 'Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have?', Legal and Criminological Psychology, vol. 9, pp. 23-35.

APA

Kebbell, M. R., Hatton, C., & Johnson, S. D. (2004). Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9, 23-35.

Vancouver

Kebbell MR, Hatton C, Johnson SD. Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have? Legal and Criminological Psychology. 2004 Feb;9:23-35.

Author

Kebbell, M R ; Hatton, C ; Johnson, S D . / Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have?. In: Legal and Criminological Psychology. 2004 ; Vol. 9. pp. 23-35.

Bibtex

@article{5ef17f9b361d4ba8a5faba5d4d36cb32,
title = "Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have?",
abstract = "Purpose. To identify the ways in which witnesses with and without intellectual disabilities are examined in court. Specifically to identify what questions are asked and what influence they have.Methods. Court transcripts were obtained. for 16 rape, sexual assault or assault trials involving witnesses with intellectual disabilities and 16 matched cases involving witnesses from the general population. The cases were assessed systematically concerning the questioning strategies of lawyers and the influence of those strategies on witness responses.Results. Questioning of witnesses with intellectual disabilities was almost identical to that of witnesses from the general population indicating that lawyers are not altering their questioning behaviour for witnesses with intellectual disabilities, either positively or negatively. Cross-examination is particularly poor for eliciting accurate memory reports, especially for witnesses with intellectual disabilities. The accounts of witnesses with intellectual disabilities are shorter and more likely to agree with a leading question than are accounts from the general population.Conclusion. The way in which witnesses are examined does little to ensure that their memories are as accurate as possible. People with intellectual disabilities should be questioned in such a way that their ability to give accurate evidence in court is maximized.",
keywords = "MILD LEARNING-DISABILITIES, MENTALLY-RETARDED PERSONS, EYEWITNESS CONFIDENCE, CROSS-EXAMINATION, ACQUIESCENCE, INTERVIEWS, RELIABILITY, COMPETENCE, ACCURACY, PEOPLE",
author = "Kebbell, {M R} and C Hatton and Johnson, {S D}",
year = "2004",
month = feb,
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "23--35",
journal = "Legal and Criminological Psychology",
issn = "1355-3259",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Witnesses with intellectual disabilities in court: What questions are asked and what influence do they have?

AU - Kebbell, M R

AU - Hatton, C

AU - Johnson, S D

PY - 2004/2

Y1 - 2004/2

N2 - Purpose. To identify the ways in which witnesses with and without intellectual disabilities are examined in court. Specifically to identify what questions are asked and what influence they have.Methods. Court transcripts were obtained. for 16 rape, sexual assault or assault trials involving witnesses with intellectual disabilities and 16 matched cases involving witnesses from the general population. The cases were assessed systematically concerning the questioning strategies of lawyers and the influence of those strategies on witness responses.Results. Questioning of witnesses with intellectual disabilities was almost identical to that of witnesses from the general population indicating that lawyers are not altering their questioning behaviour for witnesses with intellectual disabilities, either positively or negatively. Cross-examination is particularly poor for eliciting accurate memory reports, especially for witnesses with intellectual disabilities. The accounts of witnesses with intellectual disabilities are shorter and more likely to agree with a leading question than are accounts from the general population.Conclusion. The way in which witnesses are examined does little to ensure that their memories are as accurate as possible. People with intellectual disabilities should be questioned in such a way that their ability to give accurate evidence in court is maximized.

AB - Purpose. To identify the ways in which witnesses with and without intellectual disabilities are examined in court. Specifically to identify what questions are asked and what influence they have.Methods. Court transcripts were obtained. for 16 rape, sexual assault or assault trials involving witnesses with intellectual disabilities and 16 matched cases involving witnesses from the general population. The cases were assessed systematically concerning the questioning strategies of lawyers and the influence of those strategies on witness responses.Results. Questioning of witnesses with intellectual disabilities was almost identical to that of witnesses from the general population indicating that lawyers are not altering their questioning behaviour for witnesses with intellectual disabilities, either positively or negatively. Cross-examination is particularly poor for eliciting accurate memory reports, especially for witnesses with intellectual disabilities. The accounts of witnesses with intellectual disabilities are shorter and more likely to agree with a leading question than are accounts from the general population.Conclusion. The way in which witnesses are examined does little to ensure that their memories are as accurate as possible. People with intellectual disabilities should be questioned in such a way that their ability to give accurate evidence in court is maximized.

KW - MILD LEARNING-DISABILITIES

KW - MENTALLY-RETARDED PERSONS

KW - EYEWITNESS CONFIDENCE

KW - CROSS-EXAMINATION

KW - ACQUIESCENCE

KW - INTERVIEWS

KW - RELIABILITY

KW - COMPETENCE

KW - ACCURACY

KW - PEOPLE

M3 - Journal article

VL - 9

SP - 23

EP - 35

JO - Legal and Criminological Psychology

JF - Legal and Criminological Psychology

SN - 1355-3259

ER -