Oaths and the Importance of Telling the Truth
3.15 Where a decision is taken to record an interview with a witness on video,
there should be no attempt to get the witness to swear an oath, either
before or after an interview. If the witness goes on to give evidence at
court, the court will decide whether an oath should be administered
retrospectively or whether the witness is to give evidence unsworn.
3.16 Witnesses should not be asked to read out the declaration at the
beginning of Section 9 Criminal Justice Act 1967 statements
(MG11). Section 9 Criminal Justice Act 1967 only applies to the
admissibility of written statements in lieu of oral testimony. Section
19 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 governs
applications to admit video-recordings as evidence-in-chief.
3.17 Most adult witnesses should not be asked to demonstrate their
understanding of truth and lies during the interview; truth and lies is only
applicable to child witnesses and to some vulnerable adult witnesses.
Child Witnesses
3.18 Toward the end of the rapport phase of an interview with a child witness,
when ground rules have been explained to the child, the interviewer
should advise the witness to give a truthful and accurate account of any
incident they describe. There is no legal requirement to do this, but since
the video may be used as evidence, it is helpful to the court to know that
the child was made aware of the importance of telling the truth. This
should be done in the rapport phase and not later in the interview
because this might run the risk of the child concluding that the
interviewer had not believed what they had said up to that point.
3.19 It is inadvisable to ask children to provide general definitions of what is the
truth or a lie (a task that would tax an adult); rather, they should be asked
to judge from examples. The interviewer should use examples suitable
to the child’s age, experience and understanding. Secondary school-age
children can be asked to give examples of truthful statements and lies,
while younger children can be offered examples and be asked to say which
are true and which are lies. It is important that the examples chosen really
are lies, not merely incorrect statements: lies must include the intent to
deceive another person. An example of one approach is shown in Appendix
G. Different examples are suggested for different ages of children. If a child
shows a proper appreciation of the difference between truth and lies, the
interviewer should conclude by emphasising the importance of being
truthful and as accurate as possible in everything they say in the interview.
How this is put across will again vary with the age of the child.
72
Conducting the interview Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
3.20 If a child shows no appreciation of the distinction between truth
and lies during this phase of the interview consideration should
be given to commissioning an expert assessment by a clinician
of the child’s abilities, following consultation with the CPS if
necessary. A lack of understanding of truth and lies by the child
during the interview and any subsequent clinical assessment
may seriously jeopardise the evidential value of the interview.
Certain Vulnerable Adult Witnesses
3.21 Adult witnesses, both vulnerable and intimidated, should not normally
be asked about truth and lies. Its use should be limited to vulnerable
adult witnesses where there is likely to be an issue as to whether they
understand the value and importance of telling the truth in court.
Questions about truth and lies are not an issue for all adult
witnesses who have disabilities or a mental disorder.
3.22 In cases where discussion of truth and lies is appropriate, it is important
to demonstrate that the witness understands the difference between
the two. The witness could be asked to give examples of truth and lies.
If this is not possible, the interviewer can ask some questions about
this difference. If such questions are asked, they should follow the
guidance set out elsewhere on styles of questioning, and focus on the
intention to deceive rather than mere mistakes. After such questions, it
is appropriate to conclude with a statement like: ‘Please tell me all you
can remember about what happened. Don’t make anything up or leave
anything out. It is very important to tell the truth.’
3.23 Consideration should be given to commissioning a suitably qualified
expert witness to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the witness’s
understanding of truth and lies in circumstances where the nature and
extent of the witness’s disabilities are such that it is not practical for them
to demonstrate their understanding of truth and lies within the
time-constraints of an investigative interview (i.e. within a few minutes).
Any such assessment should usually take place after the interview when
it has been established that the witness has something of significance to
report and in consultation with the CPS as appropriate.
