Australian prosecutors’ perceptions of the utility of child investigative interview protocols

Abstract

Investigative interviews with alleged victims form the central plank of evidence in the prosecution of child sexual abuse. Despite interviewers being provided with a guiding framework, child sexual abuse cases are often not prosecuted because of poor-quality evidence. The purpose of this study was to elicit feedback from prosecutors about the structure and format of current interview protocols and the ways in which these could potentially be improved from an evidential perspective. Focus group discussions (ranging in length from 180 to 190 minutes) were conducted with 13 Crown prosecutors representing every jurisdiction of Australia. Thematic analysis of the focus group discussions revealed that prosecutors were supportive of the structure of interview protocols, however, concerns were raised about four of the interview elements. These elements were the oath and truth–lie competency test, the ground rules, the practice narrative and eliciting a disclosure. The prosecutors’ concerns and their implications for protocol developers and trainers are discussed.