Legal professionals’ perspectives on cross-examination of child complainants

Cross-examination of children is widely criticised. Efforts to improve the practice have had limited success. Obtaining the voices of the barristers who have experience with children’s cross-examination may provide insight as to why. Nineteen Australian legal professionals were interviewed about their decision-making, strategies, influencing factors and their perspectives on questioning children in child sexual abuse cases. Participants considered the rules of the court, the client’s instructions, the complainant and case factors in their approach to cross-examination. The analyses revealed three overarching themes: (1) How tactics are used depends on myriad factors; (2) Obligations to client versus concern for complainant requires a delicate balance; and (3) Solutions for ‘better’ cross-examination must consider defence lawyers’ perspectives. Changing cross-examination to achieve balance between defence lawyers’ obligations and complainant needs is possible, but the complexity of individual case factors on decision-making approaches may necessitate case-by-case analyses before general principles can be identified.