bepress Legal Repository

The Supreme Court, Hearsay, and CRAWFORD: Implications for Child Interviewers

Thomas D. Lyon, University of Southern California

Article comments

20 APSAC (American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children) Advisor 2 (2008). This paper can be downloaded at http://works.bepress.com/thomaslyon/59/

The full text of this version of the article is not currently available online.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to explain the implications of Crawford for child interviewing. The bottom line is that interviewers should remain committed to best practice; that is, they should continue to pursue approaches that increase the accuracy and completeness of children's reports. It would be a mistake, for example, to stop videotaping interviews in the hopes that this would render interviews non-testimonial. As for prosecutors, Crawford suggests that greater efforts should be made to enable children to testify at trial. In this article, I will briefly review the research on best practices in interviewing, discuss Crawford and the limits it places on testimonial hearsay, and explain how interviewers and prosecutors should best respond.

Subject Area

Criminal Law and Procedure, Domestic Relations, Evidence, Juveniles, Psychology and Psychiatry

Recommended Citation

Thomas D. Lyon, "The Supreme Court, Hearsay, and CRAWFORD: Implications for Child Interviewers" (May 2009). University of Southern California. University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series. Working Paper 41.
http://law.bepress.com/usclwps/lss/art41

No readers' reactions have been posted for this article. To submit one, copy the URL for this article (http://law.bepress.com/usclwps/lss/art41) and click here.