{"title":"儿童证人和对抗条款。","authors":"Thomas D Lyon, Julia A Dente","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>After the Supreme Court's ruling in</i> Crawford v. Washington that a criminal defendant's right to confront the witnesses against him is violated by the admission of testimonial hearsay that has not been cross-examined, lower courts have overturned convictions in which hearsay from children was admitted after child witnesses were either unwilling or unable to testify. A review of social scientific evidence regarding the dynamics of child sexual abuse suggests a means for facilitating the fair receipt of children's evidence. Courts should hold that defendants have forfeited their confrontation rights if they exploited a child's vulnerabilities such that they could reasonably anticipate that the child would be unavailable to testify. Exploitation includes choosing victims on the basis of their filial dependency, their vulnerability, or their immaturity, as well as taking actions that create or accentuate those vulnerabilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4212261/pdf/nihms-566838.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CHILD WITNESSES AND THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas D Lyon, Julia A Dente\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>After the Supreme Court's ruling in</i> Crawford v. Washington that a criminal defendant's right to confront the witnesses against him is violated by the admission of testimonial hearsay that has not been cross-examined, lower courts have overturned convictions in which hearsay from children was admitted after child witnesses were either unwilling or unable to testify. A review of social scientific evidence regarding the dynamics of child sexual abuse suggests a means for facilitating the fair receipt of children's evidence. Courts should hold that defendants have forfeited their confrontation rights if they exploited a child's vulnerabilities such that they could reasonably anticipate that the child would be unavailable to testify. Exploitation includes choosing victims on the basis of their filial dependency, their vulnerability, or their immaturity, as well as taking actions that create or accentuate those vulnerabilities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47821,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4212261/pdf/nihms-566838.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
最高法院在克劳福德诉华盛顿案(Crawford v. Washington)中裁定,未经质证的道听途说的证词侵犯了刑事被告与不利于他的证人对质的权利。此后,下级法院推翻了在儿童证人不愿或无法作证的情况下承认儿童道听途说的定罪。对有关儿童性虐待动态的社会科学证据的审查提出了一种促进公平接受儿童证据的方法。法院应该认为,如果被告利用儿童的弱点,使他们能够合理地预测到儿童将无法作证,那么被告就丧失了他们的对质权。剥削包括根据子女的依赖性、脆弱性或不成熟来选择受害者,以及采取造成或加剧这些脆弱性的行动。
After the Supreme Court's ruling in Crawford v. Washington that a criminal defendant's right to confront the witnesses against him is violated by the admission of testimonial hearsay that has not been cross-examined, lower courts have overturned convictions in which hearsay from children was admitted after child witnesses were either unwilling or unable to testify. A review of social scientific evidence regarding the dynamics of child sexual abuse suggests a means for facilitating the fair receipt of children's evidence. Courts should hold that defendants have forfeited their confrontation rights if they exploited a child's vulnerabilities such that they could reasonably anticipate that the child would be unavailable to testify. Exploitation includes choosing victims on the basis of their filial dependency, their vulnerability, or their immaturity, as well as taking actions that create or accentuate those vulnerabilities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal remains one of the most widely read and widely cited publications in the world. It is the second most widely subscribed journal published by any law school in the country. It is one of the most widely circulated law journals in the country, and our broad readership includes judges and legal academics, as well as practitioners, criminologists, and police officers. Research in the area of criminal law and criminology addresses concerns that are pertinent to most of American society. The Journal strives to publish the very best scholarship in this area, inspiring the intellectual debate and discussion essential to the development of social reform.