Search results

Interviewing victims of child sex abuse requires considerable care in order to minimise error. Due to children’s heightened suggestibility any question asked of a child could potentially incite error that could undermine the witness’s credibility. A focus group was conducted in order to facilitate the development of guidance for interviewers around the circumstances in which it is necessary to ask children follow-up questions in an interview. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Seven Crown prosecutors representing every Australian state and territory (with the exception of one small state) were issued with 25 hypothetical narrative accounts of child abuse and asked to indicate what information, if any, required follow-up in the child’s narrative. Their responses and rationale for requiring following up in some cases and not others were discussed.

Thematic analysis revealed three recommendations to guide questioning: whether the case involved identification or recognition evidence; the presence of contextual features that may influence the witness’s memory, or that should trigger a particular line of questioning; and whether the information can or should be sought at a later stage by the trial prosecutor, rather than by the interviewer.

The recommendations are discussed within the context of their implications for interviewing, that is, how each recommendation could be implemented in practice.

The present study extends prior literature by elucidating principles to guide decision making across interview topic areas. The need for such guidance is highlighted by research suggesting that topics such as offender identity, offence time and place, and witnesses are a source of overzealous questioning in interviews.

The purpose of this paper is to explore police officers’ perceptions of the challenges and work stressors of working in Internet Child Exploitation (ICE) investigation.

Participants were a heterogeneous sample of 32 ICE investigators across nine Australian jurisdictions. Officers’ perceptions of ICE work were elicited via individual, open-ended, anonymous, telephone interviews, which focused on both the nature and impact of work-related stressors and challenges.

Thematic analysis revealed that viewing ICE material was not perceived to be a major stressor or particularly traumatic facet of ICE investigation. Rather, the challenges related to three areas; work relationships, workload and resources and the physical environment. Participants also suggested some improvements to their work environment which could reduce the impact of these challenges.

The stressors identified by ICE investigators in this study place physical, psychological and social restrictions on investigative capacity. Modifications to the workplace environment that facilitate more effective professional collaboration, reduce workload and enhance investigator efficiency and functionality of the physical work environment would likely reduce the potential for harm associated with ICE investigation and improve ICE investigators’ capacity to perform their role.

This is the first study to use a broad research framework to examine the full range of stressors that ICE investigators face (both organisational and operational). The findings are important for developing comprehensive theories regarding workplace traumatisation as well as holistic intervention models to assist the prevention and management of stress related to ICE investigation.