Victim Statements Research Articles

피해자 진술 제도를 둘러싼 영미권의 논쟁과 그 정책적 함의

This study aims to examine the potentially controversial elements of the current victim statement system in Korea and to find solutions to them so that the system can develop in the right direction. The potential issues under discussion are drawn from the experience of Western societies, particularly the Anglo-American region. The main concerns of this article include the following issues: the conditions of acceptable statement content, the issue of allowing victims' sentencing opinions, the permissibility of references to victims' values and characteristics, the form of delivery of victim statements (oral statements, written statements, proxy statements by third parties, standard forms, etc.), the use of video or music in victim statements, and the right of the defendant to cross-examine victim’s statement. The debates and policy implications of each of these topics are organized through two frameworks: an instrumental model, which focuses on the impact of victim statements on sentencing, and an expressive model, which focuses on the victim's well-being and communicative abilities. The analysis found that the controversy and confusion surrounding the victim statement system stems in part from a lack of clarity on the purpose of the system and inadequate practical guidance for its operation. Based on this discussion, this article suggests that the following are important considerations for proper operation of victim statements: clarifying the purpose of the system and providing adequate guidance to victims; limiting prejudicial and inflammatory statements and expressions; exploring non-adversarial and eclectic approaches to the issue of a defendant's right to cross-examine a victim about his or her statements; involving victim support workers in the preparation of victim statements; and ensuring that victim statements are oriented toward victim restitution and healing.

아동 범죄피해자 진술의 증거능력과 헌법상 반대신문권 - 미국법원 판례의 비교법적 고찰

The defendant's right to cross-examine witnesses is established as a constitutional right under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Our criminal procedure law also provides for the right to cross-examine, and the Constitutional Court has determined that this right forms a core part of the constitutional right to a fair trial. However, when the victim of a crime is a child, the issue arises of how to ensure the defendant's right to cross-examination in such cases. This presents a conflict between guaranteeing the defendant's right to cross-examine and protecting the interests of the child victim. It also touches on the issue of the strict application of the hearsay rule versus the recognition of reasonable exceptions. In the United States, various cases have raised issues concerning the protection of child crime victims and the guarantee of the Confrontation Clause under the Sixth Amendment. U.S. case law has addressed controversies in instances where child victims testified using one-way closed-circuit television, or where teachers testified in court about statements made by the child rather than the child testifying directly. Additionally, a recent case in Virginia brought into question the admissibility of forensic interview recordings of a child victim as evidence. In contrast, the Constitutional Court of Korea ruled that a provision of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, which recognized the admissibility of video statements by sexual violence victims under the age of 19, violated the Constitution by infringing on the defendant's right to cross-examination, which is a core component of the constitutional right to a fair trial. Following this decision, the Sexual Violence Punishment Act was amended to harmonize the defendant's right to cross-examination with the protection of child victims. This paper examines U.S. court rulings on the admissibility of child victim statements, the decisions of the Korean Constitutional Court, and recent amendments to the Sexual Violence Punishment Act. It explores the principles and exceptions concerning the application of the hearsay rule and the right to cross-examination in cases where the victim is a child, as well as rational approaches to the operation of these systems.

The Landscape of Sexual Harm in the Video Game, Streaming, and Esports Community.

While sexual harm has been studied across a range of contexts, it has not yet been considered within the video game, streaming, and esports community. This study aimed to explore the landscape of sexual harm in this community, specifically, where it has been committed by esports professionals and video game live streamers. Fifty-five victim statements were extracted from online sources (such as Twitter/X and Reddit) and coded into variables relating to offender and victim demographics, offense characteristics, the offense process, and platform(s) used. Descriptive statistics were generated for each variable and Fisher's exact tests were conducted to examine the differences between adult-on-adult and adult-on-child cases. The findings reveal diverse offense outcomes across the sample, ranging from rape to sexual communication with a child. Some offense patterns can be seen in wider sexual offending literature, such as pre-offense alcohol consumption, offending against incapacitated victims (e.g., sleeping), and offending within an established romantic relationship. However, several offense process characteristics unique to the video gaming community were identified. These included offenders using their position of fame within the community to access victims and bypass the need for other coercive behaviors. Online offenses were more common with children and offenders demonstrated a preference for "live" methods, such as voice chat and video calling, rather than instant messaging or sharing images of themselves. This limits the digital evidence left behind and indicates the offenders' greater technological literacy. The study's findings shed light on the sexual harm that exists within this previously unexplored context and highlight areas where esports organizations, live-streaming platforms, and educational providers can do more to safeguard players, fans, and viewers in this community.

A criteria-based classification model using augmentation and contrastive learning for analyzing imbalanced statement data

Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is a forensic tool that analyzes victim statements. It involves the categorization of victims' statements into 19 distinct criteria classifications, playing a crucial role in evaluating the authenticity of testimonies by discerning whether they are rooted in genuine experiences or fabricated accounts. The exclusion of subjective opinions becomes imperative to assess statements through this forensic tool objectively. This study proposes developing an objective classification model for CBCA-based statement analysis using natural language processing techniques. Nevertheless, achieving optimal classification performance proves challenging due to imbalances in data distribution among the various criterion classifications. To enhance the accuracy and reliability of the classification model, this research employs data augmentation techniques and dual contrastive learning methods for fine-tuning the RoBERTa language model. Furthermore, model-based optimization techniques are also applied to identify augmented hyper-parameters and maximize the model's classification performance. The study's findings, including an 8.5% improvement in macro F1 score compared to human classification results, a 24% improvement in macro F1 score, and a 13% improvement in accuracy compared to previous human classification results, suggest that the proposed model is highly effective in reducing the influence of human subjectivity in statement analysis. The proposed model has significant implications for legal proceedings and criminal investigations, as it can provide a more objective and reliable method for evaluating the credibility of victim statements. Reducing human subjectivity in the statement analysis process can increase the accuracy of verdicts and help ensure that justice is served.

준거기반내용분석(CBCA)의 변별력

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is part of Statement Validity Analysis (SVA), a process that checks for the presence of 19 criteria that are known to be frequently found in the statements of truth-tellers. This study examined how well CBCA scores predict trial outcomes (guilty or not guilty) and which conventions are associated with higher conviction rates in order to validate the analysis of adult sexual assault victim statements. The results showed that the CBCA total score was not a reliable predictor of guilt or innocence. Next, we examined the truth discriminatory power of CBCA subcategories: logical structure and superfluous details were significantly higher in the guilty group and self-deprecation was significantly higher in the innocent group. The logical structure of the statement was found to be of significant value in assessing credibility, while the other cues were found to be of varying value depending on the characteristics and psychological state of the individual interviewee and the nature of the case, and thus need to be judged in a case-specific manner. These findings suggest that CBCA is a useful tool for analyzing adult sexual assault victim statements, but it is only valuable when used as part of an SVA and cannot be used as a stand-alone authenticity tool.

РІШЕННЯ ЄВРОПЕЙСЬКОГО СУДУ З ПРАВ ЛЮДИНИ В КОНТЕКСТІ КОМПЕНСАЦІЇ ШКОДИ, ЗАПОДІЯНОЇ ВОЄННОЮ АГРЕСІЄЮ

Background. The article addresses the study of the practice of the ECtHR in the context of compensation for damage caused by military aggression, which is important for determining the future strategy of Ukraine in the process of ensuring compensation for the damage caused. Methods. Formal-dogmatic, systematic and comparative-legal methods were used in the research, the basis of the research was the method of systemic analysis. Results. Some decisions of the ECHR based on the statements of victims in the Turkish-Cypriot, russian-Georgian confrontations were analyzed and the effectiveness of such method of protection as an appeal to the ECHR for compensation for damage caused by military aggression was determined. The possibility of Ukraine and other affected individuals and legal entities applying to the ECHR, taking into account the exclusion of the russian Federation from the Council of Europe on September 16, 2022, was assessed. A review and analysis of 40 decisions of the ECtHR related to military aggression was carried out, which is the basis for building the position of the injured party when applying for the protection of violated rights, since after the end of the war the most urgent issue will be the reconstruction of infrastructure, compensation for family members of the dead, wounded, prisoners of war, and other afflicted victims morally or physically together with financing the further development of Ukraine. The methods of influencing the Cabinet of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the respondent country in order to ensure the implementation of ECtHR decisions are analyzed. Possible options for the development of the events after the satisfaction of the complaints of victims of the russian-Ukrainian war are described. Conclusions. A logical summary of the analyzed topic about two possible ways of obtaining fair and real compensation for damage caused by the military aggression of the russian federation was formed and revealed: voluntary and forced.

Evaluating the validity of testimony: The role of the order of evidence

Legal practitioners sometimes ask psychologists to evaluate the validity of statements of victims, witnesses, and suspects. For their assessment, psychologists often have access to different pieces of evidence (e.g., a video recording of the interview, the suspect's statements). Research has demonstrated that the order of reviewing the evidence can affect decision-making. To examine expert witnesses' views about this, we surveyed 52 legal psychologists about their preferred order for considering the evidence in a statement validity assessment in a fictional sexual abuse case. The assessment was about the validity of the statement of the alleged child victim. The case file included the following documents: an audiovisual recording of the child interview at the police station, a verbatim transcript of that same interview, and a written statement of the suspect. Legal psychologists indicated their preferred order for reviewing these documents and explained the rationale behind their choice. There was no uniform approach among legal psychologists. About one third of respondents would first examine the audiovisual recording, then the verbatim transcript and finally the suspect's statement. In contrast, about one third would first look at the verbatim transcript, then at the recording and last at the suspect's statement. These differences in approach likely highlight the challenges and trade-offs entailed in deciding on the optimal order and emphasize the need for a discussion in the expert witness community about these issues.

The Impact of Psychological Trauma on the Statements of Victims of Gender Violence: A Challenge for Forensic Evaluation

This article examines the impact of psychological trauma on the statements of victims of gender-based violence and the challenges this poses for forensic assessment. Gender-based violence, a global public health problem, often results in psychological trauma that can significantly affect memory and the ability of victims to provide coherent testimony. The article explores how trauma alters cognitive processes, including encoding, storage, and retrieval of memories, and how this manifests in symptoms such as memory fragmentation, dissociation, and hypervigilance. Practical challenges in forensic assessment are discussed, including the misinterpretation of trauma symptoms as indicators of lack of credibility. The article proposes improvements in forensic practice, emphasizing the need for specialized training in psychotrauma for practitioners, the use of trauma-focused assessment methods, and the implementation of more sensitive legal and forensic interventions. Ethical implications are addressed, highlighting the risk of revictimization and the importance of a victim-centered approach. The article concludes by highlighting the need for more empirical research on the impact of trauma on forensic statements, and the importance of developing best practices in the forensic assessment of victims of gender-based violence. Overall, the article argues for a more trauma-informed and trauma-sensitive approach to forensic assessment that recognizes the complexities of psychological trauma and its impact on the memory and narrative of victims of gender-based violence

Sentence Analysis in Saussure's Structural Linguistics: Implications for Statements of Victims of the Kanjuruhan Tragedy

This article describes the syntagmatic and paradigmatic approaches to language. This is to distinguish two different approaches or perspectives on language because language units can explore syntagmatic and paradigmatic connections. The syntagmatic approach is contrasted with the paradigmatic approach approach to studying three different levels of analysis namely, phonology, morphology, and syntax, as a sub-discipline of linguistics. In other words, the subject matter for studying the two different approaches is mainly related to linguistic forms, phonemes (the study of sound changes at the level) structure of sounds, known as phonology), and morphemes (the study of words). structure at the level of internal word structure, known as morphology), and words (the study of how words combine to form grammatical sentences, known as syntax). This article also discusses the application of syntagmatic and paradigmatic in language teaching. AbstrakArtikel ini menjelaskan tentang pendekatan sintagmatik dan paradigmatik pada bahasa. Hal ini untuk membedakan dua pendekatan atau perspektif yang berbeda tentang bahasa karena unit bahasa dapat mengeksplorasi sintagmatik dan paradigmatik hubungan. Pendekatan sintagmatik dikontraskan dengan paradigmatik pendekatan untuk mempelajari tiga tingkat analisis yang berbeda yaitu, fonologi, morfologi, dan sintaksis, sebagai sub-disiplin ilmu linguistik. Dengan kata lain, pokok bahasan untuk mempelajari dua pendekatan yang berbeda terutama berkaitan dengan bentuk linguistik, fonem (studi tentang perubahan suara pada tingkat struktur suara, yang dikenal sebagai fonologi), morfem (studi tentang kata). struktur pada tingkat struktur kata internal, yang dikenal sebagai morfologi), dan kata (studi tentang bagaimana kata-kata bergabung untuk membentuk kalimat gramatikal, dikenal sebagai sintaksis). Artikel ini juga membahas penerapan sintagmatik dan paradigmatik dalam pengajaran bahasa.

‘This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief’: a provisional assessment of the utility of police victim statements in the qualitative understanding of domestic violence and abuse

Understanding the factors that influence the decisions made by victims of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) has, for some time, been a key area of focus for professionals working within the Criminal Justice System and academic researchers alike. Using female victims’ reported decision-making around incidences of DVA as an illustrative case study, this article analyses N=120 police victim statements (PVSs), collected by officers in one force in Northwest England. The usefulness of a PVS as a form of qualitative research data to better understand DVA is examined by means of a deductive content analysis. Drawing on the literature addressing decision-making by victims in DVA, a simple coding frame was developed to provide a structure for the initial investigation of the PVSs to examine the type of data contained in these legal documents. Findings suggest that, while they have some limitations, PVSs are a valuable and currently under-utilised form of qualitative data to research and understand victim decision-making in DVA.

성폭력 범죄의 신빙성 판단기준인 성인지 감수성에 대한 고찰

When sexual violence crimes are committed in a private space, there is little physical evidence, and it is not easy to prove the perpetrator's crime as the victim is the only witness. If the arguments of the two parties are different, there is no choice but to worry about whose statement to give faith. In sexual violence crimes, gender sensitivity appears as a criterion for judging the credibility of victim statements.
 Gender sensitivity is a broad ability to recognize gender discrimination and gender inequality, a concept that has recently emerged to improve gender-related perceptions such as gender equality and gender awareness. Originally, gender sensitivity was a cognitive concept that was not related to the legal application of criminal cases and should be applied to policies or systems. In 2018, the Supreme Court applied for the first time in sexual harassment cases. As the Supreme Court cites this in criminal proceedings, it appears to be important in its meaning under criminal law.
 However, gender sensitivity is a concept that requires judgment from the perspective of an average victim, and what it means is ambiguous. In addition, there is a concern that objective and detailed arguments may be omitted during the trial process by hastily generalizing the victim's statements. It is also very dangerous because it seems to be implicitly understood to put more credibility on the victim's statement. In addition, it may be quite unreasonable to judge guilt or innocence based on the victim's statement. This is no different from estimating facts based on the victim's statement, so there is also a risk of a public opinion trial.
 Gender sensitivity should be satisfied that the victim cannot be said to be not a victim just because he/she acted uncharacteristically. In other words, gender sensitivity cannot be the only criterion for solving sexual violence crimes. This is the same as victimhood in a narrow sense. In other words, gender sensitivity and victimhood should act as passive elements that cannot be said to be victims just because they do or do not do such actions. Therefore, gender sensitivity or victimhood cannot be the only criterion for judging the credibility of victim statements. If only statements exist and there is no physical evidence, there is only an effort to reveal the truth, but the perfect substantive truth cannot be revealed. Therefore, the contents of the statement should be comprehensively evaluated and the principle of presumption of innocence should be followed. In addition, it can be said that a case without reasonable doubt in conviction requires a high degree of certainty compared to a case with physical evidence.

Evidence In Sexual Violence Crime Cases

The focus of this research is related to the emergency phenomenon of sexual violence in Indonesia which is currently the world's concern. Evidence of criminal acts of sexual violence is often not revealed because it is constrained by the narrow evidence in the regulations for combating sexual violence crimes in Indonesia. The presence of Law Number 12 of 2022 concerning the Crime of Sexual Violence has become a breath of fresh air in the disclosure of cases of sexual violence in Indonesia, which is among the highest in Southeast Asia. To answer the objectives of this research, the type of research used is normative legal research with a statutory approach, a conceptual approach and a comparative approach, especially examining legal provisions related to evidence in sexual violence crimes in Indonesia. In the perspective of the ratio decidendi in criminal justice, it is related to the importance of evidence in overcoming this sexual violence crime in Indonesia. From the results of the study, it was found that there were several additional evidences in the Non-Criminal Act on Sexual Violence as a new regulation in dealing with sexual violence in Indonesia, including the recognition of victim statements, statements by psychologists and/or psychiatrists, electronic evidence, this is progress in the process. justice for sexual violence crimes in Indonesia by also including some additional new evidence, including psychiatrists' statements which are very helpful in disclosing cases of criminal acts of sexual violence in Indonesia which are increasingly showing alarming numbers. Entering silent evidence or evidence as a tool The evidence in the regulation of this new law provides another perspective in overcoming the crime of sexual violence in Indonesia which is difficult to uncover due to cultural factors and negative stigma towards victims of sexual violence.

헌법상 반대신문권과 미성년 성폭력 피해자영상진술의 증거능력

The Constitutional Court of Korea decided that the provision of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act that allows the use of video statements of victims of child sexual violence as evidence without cross-examination is unconstitutional in the 2021 decision. The Constitutional Court held that the right to cross-examination was the core of the right to a fair trial. According to the judgment of the Constitutional Court, it was determined that the provisions the Sexual Violence Punishment Act did not guarantee the defendant's right to cross-examination, and consequently violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. The provision stipulated an exception to the hearsay rule to prevent secondary harm to victims of child sexual violence, and the Constitutional Court judged that the provision that recognized this exception was unconstitutional. Unlike the US Constitution, there is no right to confrontation clause in the Korean Constitution. It has not been empirically confirmed whether the right to cross-examination against child victims of sexual violence contributes to the discovery of the substantive truth. Therefore, although the Constitutional Court regards the right to cross-examination as equivalent to the fundamental right under the Constitution, it is questionable whether this judgment is correct. Rather, the decision of the Constitutional Court seems to be more in line with the American legal system, which has the right to confrontation clause in the Constitution, regarding the right to cross-examination as the most effective device for finding the truth. On the other hand, the hearsay rule and the right to cross-examination are clearly stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea. The Criminal Procedure Act of Korea is oriented toward trial-centered system and adversarial trial system. Therefore, the right to cross-examination is an important device for correcting errors and discovering the substantive truth in the Korean legal system. Therefore, it is meaningful that the Constitutional Court recognized the right to cross-examination as a constitutional right and strictly interpreted the exception to the hearsay rule in the Sexual Violence Punishment Act. In the future, it will be urgent to come up with a plan to ensure the right of cross-examination of the accused without causing secondary harm to the victim by reconciling the two interests of guaranteeing the defendant's right to cross-examination and the protection of child victims of sexual violence.

성폭력 피해 진술의 신빙성 평가를 위한 준거기반 내용분석(CBCA)의 준거 재정립 연구

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) can effectively discriminate the veracity of child statement in sexual abuse cases. Therefore, CBCA is widely used to evaluate the credibility in cases of suspected child sexual abuse. However, the validity of an CBCA procedure is limited by its low inter-rater reliability. In order to identify the cause of low inter-rater reliability and solve this problem, this study proposed a method for re-establishing the definition of CBCA criteria and the evaluation principle. Hence, 13 domestic papers using CBCA and CBCA manuals of the police and prosecutors were reviewed. Accordingly, problems such as names of CBCA critera, ambiguous operational definitions, and lack of clear evaluation principle were identified. Based on this result, we proposed a specific operational definition and evaluation principle along with a unified name. Trained for 10hours evaluators analyzed transcripts of 84 sexual assault victim statements using reestablished CBCA criteria. As a result, it was found that the inter-rater reliability (ICC) for each criterion was .697-.949, which was satisfactory. Finally, the practical application of the redefined concept in this study and the future development direction were discussed.

Psychological and forensic characteristics of the process of forming statements of minor victims of violent crimes

Psychological and forensic characteristics of the process of forming statements of minor victims of violent crimes

The Likelihood of Early Guilty Pleas Following Digitally Recorded Victim Statements for Family Violence.

This study follows 4715 Family Harm cases for which charges are laid (from around 15,000 events from 2018-2020). Comparisons are made between cases where a digitally recorded victim video statement (VVS) is taken to those who (1) make a written statement, (2) refuse to make any statement and (3) present at the public counter and make a written statement. Findings indicate that VVS increases the rates of an early guilty plea by 95% (OR = 1.95, LCL = 1.34, UCL = 2.7) compared to those who decline a VVS and have a written statement. No difference is observed for those presenting to report an event at a public counter. A more modest effect is observed comparing those who refuse a statement altogether (OR = 1.28, LCL = 1.03, UCL = 1.60). A VVS is nearly twice as likely to lead to an early guilty plea. It is reasoned that there is a poor rate of guilty pleas for written statements, rather than an elevation in rates for VVS. Age and gender are unrelated to the elevated rate of pleading guilty to a VVS. Event seriousness is inversely related to pleading guilty, whereas having many prior convictions or being remanded increases the likelihood of the guilty plea.

Discussion on the Victim's Inquiry in Child Sexual Assault Cases

Due to the limitations of age and cognitive ability, children lack the ability to distinguish right from wrong and the awareness of self-protection, so some criminals can take advantage of the opportunity, resulting in children's sexual assault cases. After the occurrence of these cases, the victimized children caused a huge psychological shadow, seriously destroyed their physical and mental health, and continued to affect their life. In most cases of sexual assault on children, due to the strong concealment of the crime, the time and scene of the crime are difficult to be discovered and mastered. Child victims are often the only channel to obtain criminal information, which plays a crucial role in the detection of the case. In addition, in criminal proceedings, the statements of child victims are presented in the form of evidence, so the questioning of victims in cases of sexual assault on children becomes crucial.

Prosecutorial Use of Victim Video Statements in Domestic Violence Cases

Prosecuting agencies frequently dismiss domestic violence cases due to lack of adequate evidence and limited victim participation in the case. Evidence-based prosecution asserts high quality evidence can enhance prosecutorial decision-making and reduce the reliance on victims. Video-recorded victim statements offer a potential improvement to evidence quality by capturing additional visual and factual information for prosecutors to determine applicable charges. This qualitative study examines data from six prosecution agencies in a southwestern state to understand how they use video-recorded victim statements to inform their decision-making. Findings provide preliminary evidence on the strength of video-recorded statements in offering more information on the victim, crime, and scene; strengthening negotiations with defense counsel; enhancing case strategies; and improving victim engagement. Implications for continued research and practice are discussed.

How Victims of Strangulation Survived: Enhancing the Admissibility of Victim Statements to the Police When Survivors are Reluctant to Cooperate.

Holding perpetrators accountable for family violence is challenged when survivors are reluctant to testify. In light of recent Supreme Court precedents limiting the admissibility of statements to law enforcement in victimless prosecutions, the current study examined 130 cases of nonfatal strangulation (NFS) to determine whether case characteristics and themes across survivors' on-scene statements can help prosecutors combat common legal defenses raised when victims are unavailable for trial. The history of prior violence and how only 6% of perpetrators stopped strangling victims on their own suggests that NFS complaints should be investigated as an attempted homicide until evidence suggests otherwise.

The impact of hyperbole on perception of victim testimony

This paper investigates how individuals perceive hyperbole in victim statements. Despite being one of the most commonly used literary tropes, the comprehension and cognition of hyperbole has been largely ignored in the psycholinguistics literature, and despite detailed literature outlining the emotional behaviour of victims, the use of figurative language has been largely ignored in the forensics literature. In the present study, two experiments were undertaken. In Experiment 1, 32 participants were recruited from groups with forensic experience or training. Participants were presented with 16 victim statements; eight contained a number of hyperbolic phrases and eight contained non-hyperbolic counterparts. After reading each statement, participants were asked to answer questions that would quantify perceived credibility on accounts of belief, sympathy, victim-impact, and likeability. The results from Experiment 1 showed that hyperbolic speech made a significant negative impact on all four credibility measures. In Experiment 2, 32 jury-eligible individuals performed the same task. Results from this experiment demonstrated that the use of hyperbole made testimonies more believable and made the victim seem more impacted. Results are discussed in terms of the real-world implications of using hyperbolic language, and individual differences in the comprehension of, and reaction to, figurative statements.