Peer-reviewed article
The use of demeanour to assess the credibility of child victims in sexual interference trials
Vincent Denault, Victoria Talwar ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This peer-reviewed study examines how judges assess the credibility of child victims testifying in sexual interference trials by analyzing 44 real court judgements. The research found that judges make inferences from children's demeanour (body language and behaviour) when evaluating credibility, with differences in how demeanour is interpreted in guilty versus not guilty verdicts. The study identifies that judges hold certain beliefs about how child witnesses should behave, and that children who do not conform to these expectations may face difficulties in the judicial process.
Key points
- Judges use demeanour cues from child victims to assess credibility in sexual interference trials
- There are striking differences in how demeanour is interpreted when defendants are found guilty versus not guilty
- Judges hold specific (sometimes incorrect) beliefs about expected behaviour of child witnesses
- Children who fail to display expected behaviour or display unexpected behaviour face judicial difficulties
- The study provides insights for both scholars and legal practitioners about nonverbal behaviour assessment
Limitations
This is a descriptive qualitative analysis of court judgements rather than an empirical study of child well-being outcomes or intervention effectiveness. It focuses on judicial processes and beliefs rather than measuring the direct impact on children's welfare, protection, or development.
Abstract
Abstract How do judges assess witness credibility? This question is particularly important in cases where child victims testify. These cases are usually of a sensitive nature (e.g., involving allegations of abuse) where there are no other testimonial or material evidence to corroborate the account of child victims. To better understand what actually happens when judges preside over trials about sexual interference, and how, in actual courtrooms, they use demeanour to assess the credibility of child victims, we conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of real courts judgements (n = 44). The results highlighted that when assessing credibility in actual courtrooms, judges make a variety of inferences from the demeanour of child victims who testify live, with striking differences (and similarities) when defendants are found not guilty than when they are found guilty. The results of our descriptive study also provided unique insights about (correct and incorrect) beliefs judges hold about child witnesses, and how, if children fail to display behaviour they are expected to display, or if they display behaviour they are not expected to display, child victims could face difficulties at several stages of the judicial process. We discuss the results based on the literature on nonverbal behaviour and child witnesses, explaining their scope for scholars and legal practitioners.