One step forward and two steps back? The ‘20 Principles’ for questioning vulnerable witnesses and the lack of an evidence-based approach.
Authors
Cooper, PennyDando, Coral J.
Ormerod, Thomas C.
Mattison, Michelle
Marchant, Ruth
Milne, Rebecca
Bull, Ray
Affiliation
Birkbeck University of London; University of Westminster; University of Sussex; University of Chester, Triangle, University of Portsmouth, University of DerbyPublication Date
2018-08-19
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
It is a widely held belief that questioning vulnerable witnesses is a specialist skill. In England and Wales vulnerable witness advocacy training built around ‘20 Principles’ has been developed and is being delivered. The 20 Principles do not cite a tested theoretical framework(s) or empirical evidence in support. This paper considers whether the 20 Principles are underpinned by research evidence. It is submitted that advocacy training and the approach to questioning witnesses in the courtroom should take into account the already available research evidence. The authors make recommendations for revision of the training and for a wider review of the approach taken to the handling of witness evidence.Citation
Cooper, P., Dando, C., Ormerod, T., Mattison, M., Marchant, R., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2018). One step forward and two steps back? The ‘20 Principles’ for questioning vulnerable witnesses and the lack of an evidence-based approach. International Journal of Evidence and Proof 22(4), 392–410. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1365712718793435Publisher
SAGE PublicationsAdditional Links
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1365712718793435Type
ArticleLanguage
enDescription
Cooper, P., Dando, C., Ormerod, T., Mattison, M., Marchant, R., Milne, R., & Bull, R., One step forward and two steps back? The ‘20 Principles’ for questioning vulnerable witnesses and the lack of an evidence-based approach, International Journal of Evidence and Proof 22(4), 392-410. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1365712718793435 Copyright © 2018 (SAGE). Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications.EISSN
1740-5572ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1177/1365712718793435
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0