Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

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

    • University of Warwick
    • Lancaster University
    • University of the Sunshine Coast
    • University of Leicester
    • University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
    • Survivors Voices

    Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

    39 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)117-139
    Number of pages23
    JournalInternational Journal of Evidence and Proof
    Volume29
    Issue number2
    Early online date13 Jun 2024
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Apr 2025

    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

      UN SDGs

      This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

      1. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
        SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

      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