Video Justice Fails Children

Hundreds of video witness statements made by child abuse victims were unusable in court because the recordings were of such poor quality. A three-year Scottish Executive pilot project used shop-bought video equipment to record evidence given by vulnerable children when they spoke to police and social workers.

But a large percentage of the 500 interviews could not be used and only one formed part of a court action.

The revelations will come as an embarrassment to Cathy Jamieson, the justice minister, with child abuse charities last night accusing the Executive of trying to conduct justice “on the cheap” and saying they doubted its commitment to roll out the scheme across the country.

Experts view such evidence, which is used as a matter of course in England, as crucial in helping to give juries a better record of an interview. It also reduces the number of times a child victim of sexual abuse faces the trauma of an interview.

A police officer who worked on the Dundee pilot said they had to make do with a £600 video camera to record the children’s interviews. “We used bog-standard equipment … a high-street video camera,” said the detective. “It’s embarrassing to think how little was spent on it.

“We know now that we should have spent about £8,000 to get decent equipment. The quality could have been better.”

It is understood the Glasgow pilot was the worst, using outdated VHS tapes for recordings, while Dundee used DVDs. More sophisticated equipment has since been bought for Arbroath and Dundee.

Sandra Brown, a former lecturer who runs the Moira Anderson Foundation helping victims of abuse, described the situation as scandalous.

“They can’t even spend money on basic equipment. This demonstrates a lack of commitment from the Executive.

“There is complete apathy about making things better for child witnesses who are often the victims of sexual abuse.

“This is another example of them failing to invest … and of doing justice on the cheap.”

Two pilots were established in Dundee and Glasgow in 2003 for police and social workers to visually record joint investigative interviews with children. A total of 571 interviews were conducted during the first two years of the pilot, and 509 of these were visually recorded. Despite the benefits of video evidence, only 48 of them were viewed by procurators fiscal and 13 by children’s reporters. Only one made it to trial, at Dundee Sheriff Court.

In a report on the pilot published by the Executive this month, researchers expressed concerns about the technical quality of some of the recordings, particularly the sound.

They called for video recording to be rolled out nationally and for guidance on child witnesses to be reviewed and training updated. They said the financial outlay might be consider-able – the necessary equipment for one interviewing suite cost £8,500, and 30 sites might be needed across Scotland. It could cost up to £30,000 to refurbish each suite.

Patsy Richards, who reviewed the pilot scheme for the Executive, confirmed the main problem was the poor quality of the recordings. She said: “There needs to be some investment in the equipment. You get better-quality evidence on tape and it saves the child from giving evidence over and over again.”

One of the fiscals involved in the scheme said video evidence was vital to pick up on the body language of the child being questioned, and she urged the Executive to introduce the system across Scotland. “Children express themselves through body language and the tone of their voice is important,” she said.

Charities claim children are still being subjected to harrowing courtroom ordeals because measures intended to protect young witnesses have failed.

An investigation by The Scotsman last year found a raft of recommendations to support children in court had not been introduced, five years after they were promised. The recommendations were made by a working group commissioned by Lord Rodger, a former lord advocate.

Contrary to its findings, cases involving young witnesses in Scotland are not always given priority. A call for statistics to be published on the number of young witnesses in court and how often cases are rescheduled has also failed to materialise.

The judiciary was supposed to have specialist training on child witnesses but courses on offer are not compulsory, allowing judges and sheriffs to opt out. They are a requirement for all High Court and Crown Court judges in England and Wales.

An Executive spokesman said recorded interviews could be a useful tool to support child witnesses: “The two pilot schemes were established by police forces, in partnership with social-work departments in Dundee and Glasgow, in late 2003. We are setting up a national strategic group to test out the feasibility of such a scheme being rolled out nationally.”

The group is due to put recommendations and costs to ministers by the summer.

Catalyst for change

Scotland’s justice system faced fierce criticism over its treatment of child witnesses following the collapse of a paedophile trial in July 2001.

A young witness broke down while giving evidence and was declared unfit to continue. The case was a catalyst for change, prompting calls for reform of the way children are treated in the country’s courts.

The High Court in Edinburgh heard allegations that six men were part of a paedophile ring based in south-west Scotland, and had begun abusing two children when the pair were as young as three.

An 11-year-old girl gave evidence for ten days and was cross-examined by lawyers for all six men.

But when her brother gave his evidence, he broke down in tears and psychologists claimed he could suffer permanent damage if he continued.

Two years later, children’s rights campaigners condemned a new law on vulnerable witnesses as a waste of £5 million and claimed that it would fail thousands of youngsters who appear in Scotland’s courts every year.

Far from being a “Bill of Rights” for minors, there was concern that the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act would leave too much to the discretion of judges and sheriffs.

Campaigners claimed that Scotland’s adversarial legal system hinged on destroying child witnesses.

Giving evidence at Holyrood’s Justice 2 committee, campaigners warned MSPs that youngsters should be removed from the court process because of the psychological impact of giving live evidence.

The issue was also highlighted in June 2000 when a man was allowed to cross-examine a 13-year-old girl he was accused of raping.

John Anderson, 48, walked free from the High Court in Perth after a four-day trial.

There was a public outcry after he subjected the teenager to a harrowing courtroom interrogation for more than an hour.