Special Measures for Vulnerable Witnesses: Use, Effectiveness, and Improvement

The use of special measures (i.e., provisions introduced by the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act, 1999) to support vulnerable witnesses giving evidence in court has recently increased dramatically. Best-practice use of special measures, such as giving evidence via a TV live- link from outside the court (S.24), pre-recording of examination-in-chief (S.27) and cross-examination (S.28) before trial, and using intermediaries (i.e., neutral specialists [often speech and language therapists] that facilitate communication between witnesses and practitioners, S.29) throughout the legal process are incredibly promising legal interventions. However, the use of special measures is not centrally monitored and their effectiveness in supporting vulnerable witnesses has not been quantitatively nor systematically assessed on a large scale. Indeed, existing findings (primarily staged experiments with limited validity) on the effectiveness of special measures are mixed, and there remains considerable resistance to their implementation due to concerns that jurors will not be able to properly evaluate witnesses' credibility and defendants' rights will not be adequately protected.

The proposed research is therefore designed to investigate the use and effectiveness of current special measures used with vulnerable witnesses, specifically children, as well as to identify how improvements can be made, by adopting a multi-method, psychologically-informed approach. The first phase involves surveying practitioners (i.e., judges, lawyers, intermediaries, police) about their beliefs of and experiences with special measures, as well as their opinions about where improvements could be made. The second phase is field research, wherein systematic transcript analyses will take place, investigating the use and effectiveness of intermediary involvement with vulnerable witnesses from first assessments, through forensic interviews and/or courtroom questioning. Interviewers' questions and children's responses will be analysed and compared with control groups of similarly vulnerable children who were not afforded intermediary involvement. The final phase is a series of mock courtroom studies that will test both underlying physiological assumptions of special measures (e.g., lowered juror emotional arousal), as well as some of the current practical concerns associated with special measures (e.g., lowered juror attentiveness) that may affect decision-making. These studies also seek to test the effectiveness of technological manipulations (e.g., larger screens, better audio) to combat physiological and practical concerns (e.g., to increase juror emotional arousal/attentiveness).

Overall, it is expected that special measures will facilitate communication between children and police/lawyers when used in line with best-practice, but that extraneous factors (e.g., attitudes towards procedures, failure to adhere to best-practice standards) will prevent special measures from being wholly effective. As such, this project further seeks to develop a theoretical understanding of the processes through which legal practitioners can continue to develop and implement psychologically informed best-practice approaches when dealing with vulnerable witnesses. As a result of this research, evidence-based guidance on how to maximise the effectiveness of special measures can be used to advance subsequent practitioner training practices and inform legal policy. Practitioners, legal experts, and world-leading academics will be involved in all phases of the project, primarily through participation on the advisory board, data collection methods, and dissemination activities. This collaborative participation in the projects' interpretation will not only enrich the research, but will ensure that the proposal will have meaningful and important effects on wide-reaching international policies and practices.

The findings from this research will shed new light on the use and effectiveness of special measures with vulnerable witnesses, effects on juror emotional arousal and attentiveness when special measures are used, and how best-practice can be adopted and maintained. This research will therefore benefit stakeholders across a wide range of settings: a) vulnerable witnesses giving evidence, b) practitioners working with vulnerable witnesses, c) legal institutions using special measures, and d) the general public.

a) Vulnerable witnesses giving evidence
This program of research aims to improve the provision and effectiveness of special measures to support vulnerable witnesses by conducting an independent practitioner survey and field research of forensic interviews and courtroom questioning to investigate their current usage. The PI will also conduct experiments to investigate whether some of the concerns about special measures (e.g., lowered juror emotional arousal and attentiveness) are warranted, as well as how their use can be improved technologically (e.g., larger screens/better audio). Identifying why and how special measures are not optimally effective can direct improvements in subsequent changes to practice, policy, and training. Together, this will help to ensure that vulnerable witnesses are empowered to give their best evidence in legal settings.

b) Practitioners working with vulnerable witnesses
Improving the effectiveness of special measures will further impact legal practitioners that work with vulnerable witnesses, such as intermediaries, social workers, police officers, lawyers, and judges. If the expected findings come to fruition in the present research, results will aid in wider and more standardised availability of special measures, as well as a more advanced understanding among all practitioners of how special measures should be used optimally. This will contribute to the attitudinal shift currently occurring in the criminal justice system towards more inclusive trial practices that are sensitive to witness developmental capacities and limitations. Furthermore, by surveying practitioner beliefs and concerns about special measures and their capacity to be improved, the current research directly involves users with ensuing research and theory development, which is critical if best-practice is to be maintained. A more advanced understanding of vulnerable witness capacities when special measures are adopted will further be impactful to practitioners that support vulnerable people in contexts outside of the legal system (e.g., counsellors, social workers, teachers).

c) Legal institutions using special measures
Identifying aspects of special measures that are effective or need improvement directly impacts institutions such as the police, National Crime Agency, and the Ministry of Justice. As a result of the research, institutions will be able to target cost-effective investments in special measure provisions, implement or have access to proficient training programmes informed by the PI's methodological framework, and in turn will be better informed when considering future changes in practices, policies, and legislation relating to vulnerable witnesses and special measures.

d) General public
The general public are an important beneficiary in this research. Improvements in judicial procedures, as a consequence of a), b), and c), alongside wide dissemination and transparency of the research through the public-facing website, blogs, and final report, are likely to increase public confidence in the police and judicial system. Furthermore, due to increased transparency about the provision of supportive and effective special measures, more previously reluctant vulnerable witnesses may be likely to disclose maltreatment. This proposal therefore has potential for far-reaching social and economic impact.