权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Exploring the influence of courtroom questioning and pre-trial preparation on eyewitness accuracy

探讨法庭提问和审前准备对目击证人准确性的影响

基本信息

批准号：
AH/G010323/1
负责人：
Louise Ellison
金额：
$ 3.99万
依托单位：
University of Leeds
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2009
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2009 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FG010323%2F1
关键词：
Exploring influence courtroom questioning pre

项目摘要

When witnesses testify in court they enter an unfamiliar world. Witness preparation courses aim to demystify the court process and claim to help witnesses develop appropriate skills that will assist them to give their best evidence. When it comes to cross-examination, witnesses are given information about the standard tactics used by lawyers and given practical advice on how best to approach the interaction. They are informed about the basic rationale of cross-examination, for example, which is to discredit opposing testimony, and are directed to listen carefully to questions, to request clarification where appropriate and never to answer a question they do not understand. Proponents claim that pre-trial witness preparation puts witnesses 'on their guard' with the result that they are more likely to monitor their own comprehension and are less likely to be misled or unduly influenced by the form of cross-examination questions. These are significant claims but they have yet to be subject to empirical scrutiny. There is a substantial international literature documenting the strategies lawyers employ during cross-examination. This research indicates that standard questioning techniques can cause confusion and militate against the provision of complete and accurate testimony in legal proceedings. The impact of witness preparation as currently practiced in England and Wales on witness accuracy has not been investigated by researchers however. A number of studies have examined the impact of witness familiarisation techniques on children's ability to deal with complex court language with encouraging results but the methods of preparation employed (booklets, models and role-play) differ markedly from those utilised by witness preparation providers in England and Wales. Against this background, this study sets out to investigate:(i) the impact of standard witness preparation techniques on adult witnesses' use of comprehension monitoring strategies during cross-examination e.g. requesting that questions be repeated, rephrased or clarified; and (ii) the impact of standard witness preparation techniques on adult witness accuracy. In so doing it will provide original insights which will be of significant interest to key participants in the legal process (witnesses, lawyers, Crown Prosecution Service, judges, witness training providers, police officers) and to Government with regards the practical utility of witness preparation techniques. Witnesses play a major role in legal proceedings (both criminal and civil) and there is a clear and obvious public interest in identifying procedures that both undermine and maximise the quality of evidence received by the courts. The Court of Appeal has recently endorsed the practice of witness preparation in R v Momodou [2005] 2 All ER 571 (whilst making it clear that witness coaching is prohibited), and one might expect more organisations to become involved in witness preparation as a direct result. Current providers include leading training consultancy Bond Solon, the College of Law, the Inns of Court School of Law and the Crown Prosecution Service as well as smaller operations catering to specific professional groups. It is significant that these witness training courses are primarily aimed at fee-paying 'professional' witnesses (e.g. expert witnesses, police officers). Currently, there is no equivalent service available to ordinary lay witnesses, including victims of crime involved in criminal proceedings. By exploring the utility of witness preparation techniques, this study will help establish whether there is case for making witness preparation services more widely available, thereby contributing to an important ongoing debate regarding appropriate policy in this area.

当证人出庭作证时，他们进入了一个陌生的世界。证人准备课程旨在揭开法庭程序的神秘面纱，并声称帮助证人发展适当的技能，以帮助他们提供最好的证据。在交叉询问时，证人会得到律师使用的标准策略的信息，并就如何最好地进行互动提出实用建议。他们被告知反诘问的基本理由，例如，这是为了诋毁对方的证词，并被指示仔细听取问题，酌情要求澄清，永远不要回答他们不理解的问题。支持者声称，审前证人准备工作使证人“提高警惕”，结果是他们更有可能监测自己的理解，不太可能被盘问问题的形式误导或不适当地影响。这些都是重要的主张，但它们尚未受到实证审查。有大量的国际文献记载了律师在交叉询问中采用的策略。这项研究表明，标准的提问技术可能会造成混乱，不利于提供完整和准确的证词在法律的诉讼。然而，研究人员还没有调查目前在英格兰和威尔士实行的证人准备对证人准确性的影响。一些研究审查了证人熟悉技术对儿童处理复杂法庭语言的能力的影响，结果令人鼓舞，但所采用的准备方法（小册子，模型和角色扮演）与英格兰和威尔士的证人准备提供者所使用的方法明显不同。在此背景下，本研究着手调查：（一）标准的证人准备技术的影响，成年证人的使用理解监测策略在交叉询问，例如，要求问题被重复，改写或澄清;和（二）标准的证人准备技术的影响，成年证人的准确性。这样，它将提供对法律的程序的主要参与者（证人、律师、皇家检察署、法官、证人培训提供者、警官）和政府在证人准备技术的实际效用方面具有重大意义的独到见解。证人在（刑事和民事）法律的诉讼中发挥着重要作用，确定既损害又最大限度地提高法院收到的证据质量的程序显然符合公众利益。上诉法院最近在R v Momodou [2005] 2 All ER 571一案中认可了证人准备的做法（同时明确禁止对证人进行辅导），人们可以预期，更多的组织将直接参与证人准备工作。目前的提供者包括领先的培训咨询公司邦德·梭伦、法学院、法院法学院和皇家检察署，以及面向特定专业群体的小型业务。重要的是，这些证人培训课程主要针对付费的“专业”证人（例如专家证人、警官）。目前，普通的非专业证人，包括刑事诉讼中的犯罪受害者，还没有同等的服务。通过探讨证人准备技术的效用，这项研究将有助于确定是否有理由更广泛地提供证人准备服务，从而促进目前就这一领域的适当政策进行的重要辩论。