“It’s the judicial equivalent of robbing Peter to pay Paul” – The implementation gap in section 28 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.

Vanessa Munro, Siobhan Weare, Lorna O'Doherty, Grace Carter, Lara Hudspith, Emma Sleath, Sarah Brown, Michelle Cutland, Concetta Perot

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
15 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Section 28, the last of the special measures under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to be implemented, was rolled out across England and Wales between 2020 and 2022. This allows vulnerable and/or intimidated witnesses and complainants, who have first pre-recorded their evidence-in-chief through a police video-recorded interview, to pre-record their cross-examination, which is then presented to the court during the substantive trial. This article critically explores s.28 by drawing upon qualitative data from 108 semi-structured interviews conducted with participants across seven stakeholder groups, including criminal justice practitioners, and complainants and their families in sexual offences cases. Through a critical consideration of the articulated benefits associated with s.28 within the context of sexual offences cases, we argue that there continue to be substantial challenges associated with its implementation that reduce its prospects for success, and which need to be addressed as a priority.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)(In-Press)
JournalInternational Journal of Evidence and Proof
Volume(In-Press)
Early online date13 Jun 2024
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 13 Jun 2024

Bibliographical note

© The Author(s) 2024.
Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0)
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

Funder

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/V016202/1).

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/V016202/1).

FundersFunder number
Economic and Social Research CouncilES/V016202/1

    Keywords

    • Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
    • pre-recorded cross-examination
    • section 28
    • sexual offences
    • vulnerable and intimidated witnesses

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Law
    • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
    • Sociology and Political Science

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of '“It’s the judicial equivalent of robbing Peter to pay Paul” – The implementation gap in section 28 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this