Cross examination definition1/9/2024 Ģ8.104 When recommending, in ALRC Report 102, that such a duty should be enacted, the ALRC, the NSWLRC and the VLRC considered the duty was necessary to: protect vulnerable witnesses from improper questioning ensure ‘the best evidence is received by the court’ and overcome judges’ long standing reluctance to intervene in cross-examination. Has no basis other than a stereotype (for example, a stereotype based on the witness’s sex, race, culture, ethnicity, age, or mental, intellectual or physical disability). Is put to the witness in a manner or tone that is belittling, insulting or otherwise inappropriate or Is unduly annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive, oppressive, humiliating or repetitive or Under this provision a court ‘must’ disallow a question that: Improper questioningĢ8.103 The Commonwealth, NSW and ACT uniform Evidence Acts impose a positive duty on the court to intervene to disallow improper (‘disallowable’) questions. Because of the extent of juror misconceptions about how women and children respond to sexual assault, cross-examination is likely to play a central role in confirming the pre-existing attitudes and beliefs of jurors. There is, however, much less information available about the impact of cross-examination on adult sexual assault complainants, particularly recent information. Nonetheless, they can be subject to the same types of leading, repetitive, aggressive, intimidating and humiliating questions as children. Ģ8.102 Unless they have a cognitive impairment, adults are much less vulnerable than children during cross-examination. She found that cross-examination is one of the most difficult parts of testifying for children children are subject to complex, developmentally inappropriate and repetitive questioning and questioning deliberately designed to confuse and create inconsistencies and the powers of judicial officers to intervene to prevent improper questioning are either ‘exercised sparingly’ or sometimes have no effect on defence counsel questioning. The following section:īriefly discusses the cross-examination of children and other vulnerable witnesses in sexual assault cases andĮxamines issues concerning cross-examination where the defendant is not represented by a lawyer.Ĭross-examination of children and vulnerable witnessesĢ8.101 Cossins has documented inquiries relating to the prosecution of child sex offences, and children as witnesses within the criminal justice system over the last 14 years. It has been argued, however, that the effect of these provisions in practice has not provided a sufficient degree of protection for complainants in sexual assault proceedings. Under the common law, the uniform Evidence Acts and other legislation, limitations have been placed on inappropriate and offensive questioning under cross-examination. List of Agencies, Organisations and Individuals ConsultedĢ8.100 Cross-examination is a feature of the adversarial process and is designed, among other things, to allow the defence to confront and undermine the prosecution’s case by exposing deficiencies in a witness’ testimony, including the complainant’s testimony. Expanding specialised family violence courts in Australia.Existing specialised family violence courts in Australia.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |