Psychiatric/Psychological Assessment Interviews
2.43 The role of child and adolescent mental health specialists should be
considered where appropriate. Where assessment interviews by a
psychiatrist or a psychologist take place, their primary purpose is to
inform the childcare planning process. For this reason they will not
resemble interviews conducted in accordance with this guidance.
However, such assessment interviews can also be of assistance to
the criminal investigation, including the planning process for a video-
recorded interview. The limits and expectations of such assessments
should be agreed with the psychiatrist or psychologist prior to the
assessment taking place.
Information about Child Witnesses
2.44 Consideration needs to be given to a number of factors pertaining to the child,
their family and their background in the planning of the investigation and
interview, and in considering any request made by the child about support.
Some of this information may exist as a result of the assessment undertaken
as part of the local children’s services authority under Working Together to
Safeguard Children (Department for Children, Schools and Families, March
2010) and Safeguarding Children: Working Together Under the Children Act
2004 (Welsh Assembly Government 2006), or may be provided by other
professionals consulted or involved in the planning process. Other information
might best be provided by the child’s parent(s) or carer(s). A checklist of some
of the desirable information is provided
in Box 2.1, and, again, interviewers may find the assessment framework in
Appendix D a useful guide when considering the child in their family
context. The companion practice guidance, Assessing Children in Need
and their Families: Practice Guidance (Department of Health, 2000)
provides detailed advice on assessments involving black children and
children with disabilities. The interviewing team will need to balance the
need to obtain as much of this information as possible with their desire to
conduct the interview as soon as is practicable.
Race, Gender, Culture and Ethnic Background
2.47 The child’s race, gender, culture, ethnicity and first language should be given
due consideration by the interviewing team. They have a responsibility to be
informed about and to take into account the needs and expectations of children
from the variety of specific minority groups in their local area. Other useful
guidance can be found in the assessment framework (see Appendix D) and
companion practice guidance, Assessing Children in Need and their Families:
Practice Guidance (Department of Health, 2000). The guide Race and the
Courts (Judicial Studies Board, 1999) (available at
www.jsboard.co.uk/publications.htm) provides a helpful summary of different
religions and associated holy days and festivals.
The chapter by M. Page and G. Precey (see Appendix T) also includes
discussion of related issues. The interviewing team’s knowledge about
the child’s religion, culture, customs and beliefs will have a bearing
upon their understanding of the child’s account, including the language
and allusions the child may make, as well as, for example, the child’s
beliefs about reward and punishment.
2.48 The investigating team needs to bear in mind that some families and children
may have experienced discrimination and/or oppression through their contact
with government agencies and local authorities. Their experiences of racism,
for example, may result in them distrusting the professionals involved in an
investigative interview. Asylum-seeking children and child refugees may have
a fear of disclosing abuse because of what may happen to them and their
family.
2.49 It is also important that the investigating team considers the
complexities of multiple discrimination, for example in the case of a
black, female, disabled child, and of individuals’ experiences of
discrimination. The specific needs and experiences of dual-heritage
children need also to be taken into account.
2.50 Some possible relevant considerations include the following –
although this list is in no way intended to be exhaustive.
Interviewers must avoid ethnocentric, judgemental attitudes
towards particular forms of child rearing:
•Customs or beliefs which may hinder the child’s participation in an
interview on certain days (e.g. holy days) or may otherwise affect
the child’s participation (e.g. if older children are fasting);
•The relationship to authority figures within different minority ethnic
groups; for example, children may be expected to show respect to
adults and authority figures by not referring to them by their first
names, and by not correcting or contradicting them;
•The manner in which love and affection are demonstrated;
•The degree to which extended family members are involved in the
parenting of the child. All cultures place a high value on nurturing children, but
achieve this through a variety of family structures;
•The degree of emphasis placed on learning skills in
independence and self-care; and
•Issues of shame; for example, Muslim girls may fear bringing
shame upon themselves or their families if they disclose abuse,
and this may be further affected by expectations of them with
respect to marriage. Parents or carers may inhibit the child from
disclosing with talk of shaming the family.
Other Life Experiences
2.51 Interviewers must also consider the possible impact on the child of one
or more of the following that the child may have experienced: abuse,
neglect, domestic violence and discrimination based on race or
disability. There is no single ‘diagnostic’ symptom of any of the above,
but some possible effects on children are provided in Boxes 2.3 to 2.6. It
must be recognised that children who are abused in different ways or
who suffer the impact of discrimination in some form may exhibit all,
none or some of the behaviours listed. As a result of their culture,
language or religion, children may also have had other experiences that
impact on the interview situation.
2.52 It is important for interviewers to consider these factors in relation to
each individual child, rather than work from assumptions based on
stereotypes associated with any minority group. Being sensitive to such
factors will enable interviewers to create a safe and non-judgemental
interview environment for the child. It is essential that the interview
process itself does not reinforce any aspects of racist or otherwise
discriminatory or abusive experiences for the child.
Assessment Prior to the Interview
2.53 Interviewers may decide that the needs of the child and the needs of criminal
justice are best served by an assessment of the child prior to the interview
taking place, particularly if the child has not had previous or current
involvement with the local children’s services authority or other public
services. Such an assessment offers the opportunity to explore the factors
listed in Box 2.7 and should be considered for all child witnesses.
2.54 Interviewers must be careful to balance the need to ensure that the child is
ready and informed about the interview process against the possibility of any
suggestion of coaching or collusion (for further discussion about coaching
see R v Momodou and Limani [2005] EWCA Crim 177).
2.55 Again, the assessment framework (summarised in Appendix D) may be
helpful. A full written record of any such assessment(s) must be kept and
must be referred to in the body of the Section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act
1967 statement that reports on the planning and conduct of the interview.
This record should be disclosed to the CPS under the requirements of the
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996.
2.56 Interviewers must have clear objectives for assessment(s) prior to
interview and should apply this guidance on talking with children during
such assessment(s) (e.g. they should avoid encouraging a child to talk
about the alleged offence and should not interrupt them if they freely
recall significant events. The interviewer must make a full written
record of any discussion, making a note of the timing and personnel
present, as well as what was said and in what order. The interviewer
should begin by explaining the objectives of the interview to the child;
one possibility may be as follows:
‘We will talk about the things you are concerned about tomorrow.
Today, I want to get to know you a bit better and explain what will
happen if we do a video interview tomorrow.’
2.57 The interviewer can also use the opportunity to answer any questions the
child might have about the conduct of the interview and explain any
transport arrangements. Some interviewers use this opportunity to
introduce some of the ground rules to the child, while others do so
exclusively on the recording as part of the rapport phase of the interview.
If any of the ground rules are introduced at this stage, the child should be
reminded of them during the formal interview to demonstrate that the
necessary procedures have been completed.
2.58 The needs of the child may require that this assessment should
take place over a number of sessions. No inducements should be
offered for complying with the investigative process.
2.59 It is likely that for some children, assessment(s) will indicate that their
needs are not best met by proceeding with a full formal interview.
Vulnerable Adults
Definition
2.60 The statutory definition of a vulnerable adult witness is set out in Section
16 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (see paragraph 1.6).
Briefly, vulnerable adult witnesses are those who have a mental disorder,
learning disability or physical disorder/disability that is likely to have an
impact on the quality of their evidence.
Preliminaries
Recognising Vulnerable Adult Witnesses
2.61 Vulnerable and Intimidated Witnesses: A Police Service Guide
(Ministry of Justice 2011) contains some prompts intended to
assist in recognising vulnerable adult witnesses.
Mental Disorder
2.62 Mental disorder is legally defined in Section 1(2) of the Mental
Health Act 1983 as amended by the Mental Health Act 2007 as
any disorder or disability of the mind.
2.63 This may be the most difficult category to identify for support
through Special Measures because of the fluctuating nature of
many mental disorders. A person with such a disorder may need
special assistance only at times of crisis.
2.64 A brief interview may not reveal mental disorder, but if clear evidence and/ or a clear
diagnosis becomes available which suggests the need for Special Measures, then
these should take account of any emotional difficulties, so as to enable the witness
to give evidence with the least possible distress.
2.65 Currently there is no accepted and consistent approach to the
assessment of witness competence. It is likely that varying criteria
may be used by experts called to make assessments.
2.66 In addition, mental instability might be aggravated by alcohol, drugs and
withdrawal from drugs. The effect may be temporary and the time elapsed
before a witness is able to give clear evidence will vary according to the type
and severity of the intoxication from a few hours to a few days.
Significant Impairment of Intelligence and Social Functioning (Learning Disability)
2.67 Learning disability is not a description of one disability, but a collection of
many different factors that might affect a person’s ability in relation to
learning and social functioning to greatly varying degrees. While some 200
causes of learning disability have been identified, most diagnoses are still
‘unspecified learning disabilities’. People with high support needs may be
easily identified but people with mild or moderate learning disabilities may
be more difficult to identify.
2.68 It is impossible to give a single description of competence in relation
to any particular disability, because there is such a wide range of
abilities within each in terms of degree of intellectual and social
impairment. However, there are some indicators that may help
identify a witness with a learning disability.
2.69 Though generalisations cannot be made, some characteristics may exist
in relation to some syndromes. For example, witnesses with autistic
spectrum disorder, which includes Kanner’s syndrome and Asperger’s
syndrome, have a huge range of abilities/disabilities, but:
•They often have difficulty in making sense of the world
and in understanding relationships;
•They are likely to have little understanding of the emotional
pain or problems of others; and
•They may display great knowledge of certain topics and have
an excellent vocabulary, but could be pedantic and literal and
may have obsessional interests.
2.70 Some people with learning disabilities are reluctant to reveal that
they have a disability, and may be quite articulate, so that it is not
always immediately obvious that they do not understand the
proceedings in whole or in part.
Physical Disability
2.71 Recognition of this type of disability is less likely to be a problem, although
some disabilities may be hidden, but it is important to be aware of whether or
how a physical disability may affect the person’s ability to give a clear
statement. Most witnesses will be able to give evidence with support.
2.72 Some physical disabilities may require support. Hearing or
speech difficulties may require the attendance of a skilled
interpreter and/or intermediary.
Support for Vulnerable Adult Witnesses
Witnesses with a Mental Disorder
2.73 A mental disorder does not preclude the giving of reliable evidence.
However, for many disorders there is a need to protect the witness from
additional stress and provide support to enable them to give reliable
evidence. The recall of traumatic events can cause significant distress,
and recognition of the mental state of the witness and its effect on their
behaviour is crucial. There is also the need to ensure that the type of
behaviour is identified, as far as possible.
2.74 Witnesses with a mental disorder, such as schizophrenia or other delusional
disorders, may give unreliable evidence through delusional memories or by
reporting hallucinatory experiences, which are accurate as far as the witness is
concerned but bear no relationship to reality (e.g. they might describe a non-
existent crime). Challenges to these abnormal ideas may cause extreme
reactions and/or distress. Interviewers should probe these accounts carefully,
sensitively and in a non-judgemental way with a view to identifying which
elements of the account may be delusional and which elements might have a
firmer foundation in reality.
2.75 Witnesses may suffer from various forms of anxiety through fear of
authority, exposure or retribution. Extreme fear may result in phobias,
panic attacks or unjustified fears of persecution. Anxious witnesses may
wish to please, they may tell the interviewer what they believe they wish
to hear or fabricate imaginary experiences to compensate for loss of
memory. The evidence given by depressed witnesses may be
influenced by feelings of guilt, helplessness or hopelessness.
Witnesses with antisocial or borderline traits may present with a range
of behaviours such as deliberately giving false evidence. These
disorders cause the most difficulties and contention in diagnosis, and
require very careful assessment.
2.76 Witnesses, particularly some older witnesses, may also have dementia,
which can cause cognitive impairment. A psychiatrist or clinical
psychologist with experience of working with older people should be
asked to assess their ability to give reliable evidence and the effect such a
procedure might have on their health and mental welfare.
2.77 Witnesses with a mental disorder may show some of the behaviour seen in
witnesses with a learning disability, such as confusion, memory loss and
impaired reasoning. For this reason, many of the interview practices that
are likely to help witnesses with a learning disability may also benefit
witnesses with a mental disorder. Properly preparing the witness for the
interview may help to identify and reduce confusion, emotional distress and
anxiety. Cognition may not be an immediate difficulty, but attention to the
way a statement is given and how questions are posed must always be
considered.
2.78 The witness may wish to please the person in authority. They may be
suspicious of the person, aggressive, or wish to impress the interviewer.
Interviewing teams should be aware of such possibilities. Consultation
with people who know the witness well should give some indication of
their likely behaviour and some suggestions as to how interviewers can
best interact with the witness.
2.79 Confusion may be exacerbated by the use of drugs or alcohol or
withdrawal from drugs. An assessment should include information as
to how this is likely to affect the interview, and how long this effect is
likely to last.
2.80 Preparation of the witness for the interview and a rapport stage prior
to formal questioning during the interview is essential. This will allow
the witness to have some familiarity with the personnel who will be
involved in the interview, including the interviewer, interview monitor
and intermediary (where used).
Witnesses with a Significant Impairment of Intelligence and Social
Functioning (Learning Disability)
2.81 Some witnesses with a learning disability may wish to please people in
authority. Some may be suspicious of people, or aggressive, or may wish
to impress the interviewer. Interviewing teams should be aware of such
possibilities. Consultation with people who know the witness well should
give some indication of their likely behaviour and some suggestions as to
how interviewers can best interact with the witness.
2.82 Some witnesses with a learning disability may show confusion,
memory loss and impaired reasoning. Properly preparing the
witness for the interview may help to identify and reduce
confusion, emotional distress and anxiety.
2.83 In some instances of mild and moderate learning disability, a difficulty with
cognition may not be immediately apparent. The experience that many people
with learning disabilities have of discrimination towards them in society is likely
to act as an incentive to conceal or minimise their disability whenever possible.
Where there are concerns that a witness has a learning disability, even if the
extent of the disability is considered to be relatively mild, it is essential that a
great deal of care is taken in framing questions and evaluating the witness’s
response to them.
2.84 Some witnesses with a learning disability communicate using a mixture of
words and gestures (e.g. Makaton signs/symbols when used as an
augmentative communication system). While an intermediary should be
considered in every case where a witness has a learning disability, the
services of an intermediary are essential in circumstances where a witness
communicates using a mixture of words and gestures.
2.85 Some witnesses with a learning disability do not use speech but communicate
using alternative methods of communication. Such alternative methods include
sign and symbol systems. Examples of sign systems include Makaton signing
and Sign-a-long (these systems may be used either as an augmentative
system with speech or as an alternative system without it). Examples of
symbol systems include Rebus, Bliss and Makaton. The symbols may be
printed on boards or cards, or contained in booklets. They vary from being
iconic and concrete to being more abstract in their composition. They may be
personalised and can be composed of words, pictures and symbols. While an
intermediary should be considered in every case where a witness has a
learning disability, the services of
an intermediary are essential in circumstances where a witness uses
an alternative method of communication instead of speech.
2.86 Many witnesses with a learning disability will be unable to give their
evidence in one long interview. In many instances, several short
interviews, preferably held on the same day (though not necessarily),
would be more likely to lead to a satisfactory outcome.
2.87 Preparation of the witness for the interview and a rapport stage prior
to formal questioning during the interview is essential. This will allow
the witness to have some familiarity with the personnel who will be
involved in the interview, including the interviewer, interview monitor
and intermediary (where used).
Witnesses with a Physical Disability
2.88 For witnesses with hearing and communication difficulties, every
effort should be made to ensure that their usual means of
communication is supported at interview by means of an interpreter
(and/or an intermediary, if appropriate).
2.89 If the witness does not communicate by speech, alternative
communication systems are available, such as British Sign Language
(BSL) and Sign Supported English (SSE). In these instances, an
interpreter capable of signing will be required.
2.90 Other sign and symbol systems may be required for witnesses with additional
disabilities. Examples of sign systems include Makaton signing and Sign-a-
long. Symbol systems include alphabet boards and boards/ books/cards
containing pictorial symbols (these symbols vary from being iconic and
concrete to being more abstract in their composition). Examples of pictorial
symbol systems include Makaton, Rebus and Bliss. Communication boards
may also be personalised and composed of words, pictures and symbols. In
these circumstances, an intermediary capable of using the communication
system in question will be required.
2.91 Some witnesses may also communicate using a mixture of words and gestures.
If a witness has an idiosyncratic speech or communication pattern, a
vocabulary should be worked out which will need to be explained to all the
personnel present at the interview. Initially at least, signs for ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘don’t
know’ and ‘don’t understand’ should be identified.
2.92 Witnesses who have limited movement may require computer or other
electronic communication equipment that can be accessed via fingers, or
by pointing to letters or symbols on a board, or by indicating letters or
symbols by blinking or by some other means. Witnesses should move or
point to the letters or symbols themselves whenever possible.
2.93 The witness may have some associated health or mobility
difficulties and would benefit from short interviews, spaced out with
periods of rest and refreshment.
2.94 Preparation of the witness for the interview and a rapport stage prior
to formal questioning during the interview is essential. This will allow
the witness to have some familiarity with the personnel who will be
involved in the interview, including the interviewer, interview monitor
and intermediary (where used).
Consent
2.95 It is a general principle that all witnesses should freely consent to be
interviewed and to have the interview recorded on video. For this
reason, interviewers should explain the purpose of a video-recorded
interview to the witness in a way that is appropriate to their
understanding. Such an explanation should include:
•The benefits/disadvantages of having or not having the interview
video-recorded;
•Who may see the video-recorded interview (including the
alleged offender both before the trial and at court); and
•The different purposes to which a video-recorded interview may
be put (e.g. if it appears the video may be useful in disciplinary
proceedings against a member of staff who is suspected of
abusing a vulnerable adult in their care).
2.96 While interviewers should make a record of the action taken to
obtain consent for a video-recorded interview, it is not necessary for
the witness to give their consent in writing.
2.97 Obtaining consent for a video-recorded interview may raise difficulties with
regard to some groups of vulnerable witnesses, such as those with a
learning disability or a mental disorder. In these circumstances, it is
important to take account of the principles set out in the Mental Capacity
Act 2005 and the Code of Practice that accompanies it.
2.98 Briefly, the Mental Capacity Act applies to anyone over 16 who lacks
mental capacity and a ‘decision’ needs to be made. A ‘decision’ covers
a wide range of matters and would include consent to a video-recorded
interview. The Act establishes the principle that everybody should be
assumed to have capacity unless established otherwise. It goes on to
point out that a communication issue should not be confused with a
capacity issue and that every effort should be made to communicate
with people, using whatever methods are necessary. An intermediary
may be of use in these circumstances (see Section 29, Youth Justice
and Criminal Evidence Act 1999).
2.99 If, following an assessment (the extent of which depends on the
circumstances), it is concluded that lack of capacity is an issue, actions
should be taken in the ‘best interests’ of the witness. As far as is reasonably
ascertainable, when considering the person’s best interests particular
account should be taken of the matters set out in Box 2.8.
2.103 When considering best interests, account should also be taken of
any possibility that the witness will regain capacity and, if so, when
this is likely to be (Section 4(3), Mental Capacity Act 2005). This is
important in circumstances where, for example, the effect of a
witness’s medication on their capacity to make a decision changes
over time or when a witness is likely to recover from an injury or an
illness to the extent that they are likely to be able to participate more
fully in the process of making a decision.
2.104 Records should be kept of all decisions taken in a person’s best
interests, the rationale for that decision and the scope of the
consultation that took place in reaching that decision.
