The construction of allegedly abused children’s narratives in Scottish criminal courts

ABSTRACT

This study investigated lawyers’ use of social narratives surrounding child sexual abuse when questioning 66 5- to 17-year-old alleged victims in Scottish criminal courts using a mixed-methods approach. Thematic analysis found that the use of beliefs and stereotypes varied depending upon the lawyers’ role (defense/prosecution), children’s age, and the alleged victim-defendant relationship. These findings were investigated further using narrative analysis, which showed that, with increasing age and decreasing familiarity with defendants, narratives increasingly focused on the characteristics and actions of the victims rather than the defendants. Older children contributed more to narratives than younger children, but their contributions were only incorporated into the prosecutors’ narratives. Defense lawyers adopted more victim-blaming tactics as the narratives developed. Findings suggest that the criminal justice system, practitioners, and researchers must do more to recognize and guard against the reinforcement of stereotypes that may influence public rhetoric and jury decision-making.

KEYWORDS:

• Child sexual abuse
• child sexual abuse investigations
• child witnesses
• stereotypes
• witness evidence

Acknowledgments

The authors are extremely thankful to the Court Service Team of the Scottish Court Service and the Typing and Secretarial Team of the Supreme Courts for their assistance with accessing cases and files, their hospitality throughout the transcription process, and their continued support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Michael E. Lamb http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6792-3526

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by an Economic and Social Research Council studentship to Samantha J. Andrews. The research was completed as part of Ms. Prince’s undergraduate dissertation at the University of Cambridge.