Constitutional Challenges to Child Witness Protection Legislation: An Update

By Small, Mark A. | Violence and Victims, January 1, 1994 | Go to article overview

Constitutional Challenges to Child Witness Protection Legislation: An Update


Small, Mark A., Violence and Victims


The Supreme Court's landmark decision in Maryland v. Craig created some uncertainty about the state constitutionality of child witness protection legislation. This article briefly discusses the current status of child witness protection legislation in light of recent litigation, focusing on Illinois. Conclusions are drawn concerning the likely future course of litigation affecting child witness protection legislation in other jurisdictions.

States have passed a variety of laws to make legal proceedings less traumatic for children. Specifically, state legislatures have passed laws to protect children who might suffer emotional distress as a result of directly confronting defendants in criminal trials. These laws typically provide for a physical separation of the child witness and the defendant so that the child does not actually face the defendant in the courtroom, though it is still possible for the judge or jury to view the child during the oath, testifying, and cross-examination. Laws permitting a child to testify without directly facing the defendant have evolved from placing a screen between the child and the defendant to the use of recorded videotaped depositions, one-way closed-circuit television for testimony, and/or the use of two-way closed-circuit television.

Laws designed to protect children as witnesses have not gone unnoticed by the research community or unchallenged in the legal community. Psychologists in particular have established a growing body of research relevant to child witnesses; unfortunately, little of this research pertains directly to child witness protection legislation (Small & Melton, 1994). Within the legal arena, arguments based on federal and state constitutions have been used to challenge child protective schemes, often with divergent results. This article briefly discusses the current status of relevant laws and litigation. Recent legal activity affecting child witnesses in Illinois is described and conclusions are drawn concerning the likely future course of child witness protection legislation in other jurisdictions.

CURRENT LEGISLATION

At least 48 states have enacted legislation permitting the courtroom use of videotape and/or closed-circuit television in legal proceedings involving child witnesses (McAuliff & Perry, 1994). In states that authorize the use of a one-way system, the child is typically outside the courtroom, though the judge or jury and defendant may view the child on a video monitor during the testimony. In states that authorize the use of a two-way system, the child witness is able to see the courtroom and the defendant on a video monitor while the judge and jury view the child during testimony. In states lacking specific statutory authority for the use of video technology, courts in some jurisdictions may still order special procedures to protect child witnesses as part of their inherent powers to facilitate justice, though it is unsettled as to how far courts may go in adopting special procedures (see e.g., State v. Kasel, 1992).

McAuliff and Perry (1994) note how statutes differ among states. For example, in 15 states the use of video technology excuses the child from trial, 36 states permit the defendant to view the child through video while testifying, and in 9 states the videotape of the child's testimony is subject to protective order. One conclusion to be drawn from examining the compilation of statutes is that there is little uniformity in state statutes regarding the specific use of video technology in child witness cases (see also, Whitcomb, 1992). Despite the lack of uniformity in statutes, the legal challenges thus far have been fairly consistent

LEGAL CHALLENGES

A critical legal issue presented by such procedures is whether they violate a defendant's federal right under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to confront adverse witnesses or a defendant's corresponding state constitutional right to confrontation. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Constitutional Challenges to Child Witness Protection Legislation: An Update
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.