Graduate School of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA .... actively pursued by the Social Welfare Department and the Police Force. Included ...
Child Abuse& Neglect,Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 273-284, 1997 Copyright© 1997 ElsevierScienceLtd Printed in the USA. All rights reserved 0145-2134/97 $17.00 + .00
Pergamon
PII S0145-2134(96) 00154-8
DEVELOPING THE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR VIDEO-RECORDED CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE INVESTIGATIONS: A TRAINING EXPERIENCE WITH POLICE OFFICERS, SOCIAL WORKERS, AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS IN HONG KONG KAM-FONG MONIT CHEUNG Graduate School of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
Abstract--A series of training programs which focused on culturally relevant questioning skills and video-recorded interviews in child sexual abuse cases were designed for social workers, police officers, and clinical psychologists in Hong Kong. An interview protocol was developed with four stages: rapport building, free narrative of account, questioning, and closure. The content analysis of 74 role-played interviews of video-recorded investigation revealed 119 questions and statements that were rated by these professionals and their instructor as helpful techniques in interviewing children suspected of having been sexually abused. Although each professional interviewed child victims with a unique style, they all found that maintaining a balanced perspective to play their roles in protecting the child, assessing the child, and collecting evidence was the most important aspect in an investigative process. © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd Key Words---Child sexual abuse, Videotape interviews, Police and social workers, Interdisciplinary efforts in sexual abuse training.
INTRODUCTION C H I L D S E X U A L A B U S E is not a new social p r o b l e m but its surrounding laws have been constantly changing in response to the need o f protecting vulnerable witnesses. This victimfocused m o v e m e n t was initiated b y child advocates w h o w o r k e d closely with child abuse victims (Failer, 1996). Child victims o f intrafamilial sexual abuse are especially vulnerable b e c a u s e they m a y testify against s o m e o n e they k n o w personally and recall their painful experience with s o m e o n e close to t h e m in the family. The investigative process in sexual abuse cases is distressing b e c a u s e the victims are often required to repeatedly share their past experience with m a n y unfamiliar faces. T h e y are subjected to numerous interviews b y various professionals, including teachers, school counselors, social workers, p o l i c e officers, nurses, physicians, and other health and mental health professionals. T e d e s c o and Schnell ( 1 9 8 7 ) indicated that these professionals, if not e q u i p p e d with adequate interviewing skills, can further traumatize the child victims b y asking insensitive or leading questions. Slicner and Hanson ( 1 9 8 9 ) also pointed out that mistakes such as " l e a d i n g questions, differential reinforcement, coercion, bribery, or f o r c e " could significantly reduce the credibility o f the child during a Recieved for publication June 24, 1996; final revision received August 30, 1996; accepted September 4, 1996. Reprint requests should be addressed to Dr. Monit Cheung, GSSW, University of Houston, Houston, TX 772044492. 273
274
K.M. Cheung
videotaped interview (p. 68). Investigations that are inappropriately conducted may also jeopardize the child's mental health, making the child feel unsafe, hopeless, guilty, and shameful (Jaudes & Martone, 1992). Since the investigative process involves multidisciplinary team efforts, it is important to provide training for team members to work toward the same goal--"working together and trusting each other for the welfare of the child." This goal statement has been adopted by a newly formed child abuse investigative team composed of social workers, police officers, and clinical psychologists in Hong Kong to constantly remind themselves that a collaborative effort is essential in child protection. From working experience with this team, this article reports an interview training program for child sexual abuse investigation in Hong Kong by: (1) addressing child sexual abuse awareness in Hong Kong; (2) identifying major interviewing techniques used in the video-recorded interviews with children suspected of having been sexually abused; and (3) analyzing the outcomes of a joint training effort designed for social workers, police officers, and clinical psychologists. Child Sexual Abuse Awareness in Hong Kong At present, Hong Kong does not have a mandatory reporting system in child protection service (CPS). Family Service Centers and the Child Protection Services Unit operated by the Hong Kong Government's Social Welfare Department, as well as nongovernment organizations (NGOs) such as Against Child Abuse, the Caritas-Hong Kong, and the Hong Kong Family Welfare Society are handling cases of reported child abuse. With a population of 7 million in 1996, Hong Kong has only 20 government caseworkers specializing in child protection who testify in civil and criminal cases. Although it is anticipated that more caseworkers will join this team, child abuse cases have been handled by both the government and NGOs' staff to deal with the problem of resource shortage. The Hong Kong Government has addressed the general problems of child abuse since the 1970s. Child sexual abuse, however, has not entered the picture of public awareness until recently when it represented less than 1% all established child abuse cases prior to 1990, and increased to 3.5% in 1991, 7% in 1992, 14.7% in 1993, 17.1% in 1994, and 20.1% in 1995 (Social Welfare Department, 1996). This increase was a response to the publicity efforts on the prevention of child sexual abuse in the past 5 years. Educational leaflets have been printed by the Social Welfare Department and other NGOs to educate people to detect signs of sexual abuse. This prevention effort aims at helping children and their families to prevent sexual abuse. However, the culture of saving "face" for the family is still a strong barrier covering many intrafamilial abuse cases. In a study of 13 intrafamilial sexual abuse cases (Lau, 1996), the victims (mean age 14.2) accidentally disclosed their experience after an average of 5 years of abuse. Multiple victims and multiple abuse occurred in these families. Unfortunately, incest is a hidden problem and often goes unreported and untreated. In June 1994, the Working Group of Child Abuse (1996) launched a project to recommend a set of procedures for handling child sexual abuse cases. In December 1995, the interdisciplinary Child Protection Special Investigation Team was formally established. In a month's time, the team investigated and videotaped a total of 23 child sexual abuse cases. Because of the visibility of this team, the number of investigative cases of intrafamilial sexual abuse quickly escalated from less than 20 a year in the past 5 years to 16 cases in just 1 month. Although many cases are still unreported due to fear and shame, it is believed that incest victims are increasingly aware of their rights, the reporting channels, and the community resources (Sing Pat, 1994). In 1995, the Hong Kong Government passed an amendment of the Criminal Procedure
Video-recordedinterviews in child sexual abuse
275
Ordinance. Its aim is to provide viable means to enable children and other vulnerable victims to give evidence via video-recording interviews or testify in person through a closed-circuit monitor in the courtroom. The amended definition of child sexual abuse includes specific examples of abusers and situations (Working Group on Child Abuse, 1996, p. 1 ): "The involvement of a child in a sexual activity which is unlawful, or although not illegal, to which the child is unable to give informedconsent. This includes direct or indirectsexual exploitationand abuse of a child by individuals whether inside the home or outside; abuse by parents, carers, or other adults singly or acting in an organized way, or children; abuse which is rewarded or apparently attractive to the child; and abuse by individuals whether known or strangers." With new legislative changes in process, training in video-recording interviews is a first step to prepare competent professionals in handling sensitive child abuse cases, especially in sexual abuse situations. Before the amendment that permits investigative videotapes to be admissible in court was implemented in December 1995, planning for its implementation was actively pursued by the Social Welfare Department and the Police Force. Included in the planning activities were a series of interdepartmental meetings of various departments and agencies, an intensive training program delivered by a team of trainers (a social worker, a police trainer, and a medical practitioner in CPS practice) from the United Kingdom in June 1995, and a follow-up training course focusing on Chinese cultures conducted by a Chinese clinical practitioner (specialized in child sexual abuse) from the United States 4 months after the training program. This article reports on the specialized training program provided for the Child Protection Special Investigation Team in October 1995 with a focus on micro interviewing skills for handling child sexual abuse cases and specific techniques in conducting video-recording interviews with Cantonese-speaking victims.
Culturally Focused Videotaping Interviews According to Mak (1990), social work training in the 1990s requires the inclusion of "the cultural dimension of social life and social problems" (p. 1 ). In a specialized training program on interviewing child sexual abuse victims, cultural sensitivity is a pre-requisite and using culturally relevant questioning techniques is a focus of attention. Seventy-four trainees participated in this training program in October and November of 1995, which focused on videorecording investigative interviews with Chinese child sexual abuse victims in Hong Kong. These trainees had acquired basic knowledge and skills in child sexual abuse investigation through training and/or actual practice prior to training. Thirty-eight trainees came from the Social Welfare Department (31 social workers and seven clinical psychologists) and 36 represented the Police Force. They were divided into four groups, each attending a 5 day training program. The training curriculum had two major components: language skills and videotaping interviews. During the program, the trainees focused on the practice of questioning skills and conducted video-recorded interviews in an actual interviewing suite designed for videotaping purposes. Each trainee role-played in three videotaping interviews (of actual scenarios) and performed each of the three roles: being the interviewer, the monitor, and the child. The interviewing time averaged 38 minutes per case. Because the admissibility of videotape interviews is a new development in the field of child sexual abuse, none of these professionals had yet conducted an actual videotape interview prior to training.
Curriculum Component 1: Questioning Skills Trainees practiced their skills of interviewing children. Seven areas were emphasized: ( 1 ) use simple words; (2) avoid sentences with many ideas or propositions; (3) avoid negatives;
276
K.M. Cheung
(4) avoid overuse of pronouns; (5) clarify the child's terminology of private body parts; (6) avoid changing the child's language; and (7) avoid leading questions. Beyond being knowledgeable about children's language development, trainees were required to know children's terminology of private body parts according to the local culture. Body parts were separately listed for females and males, including terms for penis, vagina, bottom, buttocks, breast, and anus. They wrote down the common terms of private body parts and took turns pronouncing them in Cantonese. This exercise served two purposes. First, trainees prepared themselves to accept that the child victims would use sexually explicit terms to describe the abuse during an actual interview. Second, trainees would not feel embarrassed when they repeated the child's terminology for clarification purposes.
Curriculum Component 2: Videotape Interviews The interview protocol for video-recorded child sexual abuse investigations included four major stages: rapport building, free narrative account, questioning, and closure (Gardner, 1995; HMSO, 1994). A standardized protocol was used to ensure that the interviewer would ask all necessary questions that would help establish the child's account and validate the case (See appendix 1 ).
FINDINGS Using the standardized interviewing protocol, 74 interviews were conducted. Among these interviews, the following techniques were found most helpful: (1) building rapport with the child; (2) addressing the child's feelings when the child does not want to continue; (3) using the 4WH technique (What, Who, Where, When, and How) to ask questions; (4) not using leading questions; and (5) clarifying the child's information by using follow-up questions. Questions to clarify the abuse situation were asked only after the child had disclosed abuse. Since each interviewing suite in Hong Kong has a monitoring room and the interviewing team is comprised of an interviewer and a monitor, it is essential to announce the identity of the monitor at the start of the videotape. A content analysis of these 74 videotaped interviews was conducted to help trainees evaluate their level of skill obtainment immediately after the training. Excluding the standardized introductory and closure statements, 119 questions and statements were rated by both the trainer and trainees to be helpful or extremely helpful. In addition, skills such as "following clues," "active listening," "not interrupting the child," "demonstrating appropriate empathy," "using 'minimal' encouragers" (example: "um hm" rather than "yes, yes, go on," etc.), and "using culturally appropriate eye contact," were rated by the child actors as helpful in most interviews. These skill items are congruent with previous research findings by Stevenson, Leung and Cheung (1992). Appendix 2 shows the 119 interviewing techniques (the number next to each question does not necessarily indicate the order of interviewing steps).
IMPLICATIONS The questioning techniques described in this article represent a collection of questions strongly recommended by three groups of professionals--social workers, clinical psychologists, and police officers. Since the purpose of the joint training was to promote interdisciplinary collaboration, the techniques were evaluated from the perspectives of protecting the child,
Video-recordedinterviews in child sexual abuse
277
assessing the child, and collecting evidence for the purpose of prosecutions. Although each professional interviewed the child victim with a unique style, they all found that the training program was helpful in these three areas.
Protecting the Child Rapport building skills were essential because the victims were generally afraid to tell their abuse experience to a "stranger." Most trainees were able to use appropriate skills to work through the child's resistance and identify information that helped them determine a plan to protect the child from further harm. The police officers generally did not respond to or avoided personal questions that were related to the child's current feelings or emotions. In addition, when the child asked the interviewer not to repeat the "secret" to other people, most trainees found it difficult to respond. In order to assess risk and work closely with the child, the interviewer could simply address the child' s fear by saying, "What are you concerned about?" or " W h o else shouldn't know about this?" If the child kept silent, the interviewer could use some silent time before reassuring the child, " I will try my best to help you if I know what has been bothering you."
Assessing the Child All trainees agreed that it was important not to sound judgmental or biased against the alleged perpetrator or the child victim so that they could accurately assess the child's account and the child's love/hate relationship with the alleged perpetrator. The questions used in rapport building and those for clarifying the child's terminology of sexual abuse were found to be particularly helpful in assessing the child's developmental level and age-appropriate knowledge about the described sexual acts. Because the terminology of sexual parts may vary from one child to another, it is important to clarify these terms in order to get the most accurate information. Especially when interviewing an adolescent, it is helpful to say, " I may ask you questions to clarify some terms you use in our conversations. It doesn't mean that I don't understand you. It may mean that I cannot assume I know the meaning if I haven't checked that with you." In addition, checking the child's understanding of telling the truth was used to smooth the transition from building rapport to asking the child about the details of abuse. More importantly, it was also aimed at helping the child understand his or her responsibility for telling the truth so that possible false allegations could be identified at an early stage.
Collecting Evidence When asking about the incidence of sexual abuse, the trainees demonstrated their strengths in obtaining detailed information. Techniques to seek further clarifications were used if the child forgot or did not know the information.
What. If the child mentioned the abuse in a "free narrative format," the interviewer would clarify specific information by repeating the child's description at a later point. For example, " Y o u mentioned earlier that your uncle touched your pee-pee, what is your pee-pee?" Where. If the child mentioned a general place of abuse (home, school), the interviewer would ask the child to describe the place (e.g., address, number of rooms, signs on the door, presence of a window, decorations, other surroundings) and the exact location of abuse (e.g., "Where is the bed? . . . . Which r o o m ? " )
278
K.M. Cheung
Who. If the child did not know the alleged perpetrator's (AP's) full name, the interviewer would ask about the AP's physical characteristics or other personal identifiers such as age, gender, ethnicity, occupation, address, and so on. When. If the child forgot the exact date and time of abuse, the interviewer would ask additional questions based on the child's school activities on that day, the TV program that was shown before and/or after abuse, holidays or special events occurring around that day or time period, or daylight, weather, and so forth. How. If the child described something that he/she could not possibly have seen (such as how
the AP performed anal sex with the child), the interviewer would ask how the child knew it happened and clarify what the child saw, heard, felt, smelled, or tasted.
THE LEARNING LESSON FROM AN OUTCOME-FOCUSED TRAINING The interdisciplinary training initiative marked a successful collaborative effort to re-examine the interviewing skills of competent professionals. The three groups of professionals--social workers, clinical psychologists, and police officers--demonstrated their strengths and at the same time learned from each other. The outcomes of this training included learning the questioning techniques used in an investigative interview with a child victim of sexual abuse. As demonstrated in the videotaping interviews, both the social workers and clinical psychologists had applied their skills in rapport building and established good relationships with the victims. The police officers learned to be supportive of the victim and change their authoritarian image to a firm but friendly attitude when interviewing children. During this process of videotape training, it was found that since the social workers and clinical psychologists were mental health professionals, they tended to use more time in rapport building to assess the child's developmental level and knowledge competency. On the other hand, the police officers tried to assess reliability and validity of the case by asking many " h o w " questions throughout the interviewing process. In terms of child protection, the mental health professionals were sensitive to the child's concerns of unwanted consequences, while the police officers were concerned about the child's possible recantation. When asking about the detailed descriptions of abuse, the police officers usually requested that the child identify as much information as possible regarding the identity of the alleged perpetrator and the location of abuse. On the contrary, the social workers and clinical psychologists clarified information of how the abuse happened and then checked how the child victim felt at time of abuse and at the time of interview. In this training experience, the use of videotaped roleplayed interviews not only provided immediate feedback to the trainees regarding their interviewing styles and skills, but also identified their strengths and limitations when asking information from a child victim. The information presented in this article not only describes practical training outcomes, but it also identifies the fact that the interdisciplinary team approach in child sexual abuse interviews is an important method of investigation. Wording of the questioning techniques has been checked by an experienced interdisciplinary team in a child advocacy center. For future research, it is essential to have them also tested and modifed by attorneys who charge or defend child sexual abuse cases. As a first attempt, nevertheless, the protocol and questioning skills will serve as a practical guide for child sexual abuse investigations as well as a tool for assessing interviewer's competency.
Video-recorded interviews in child sexual abuse
279
REFERENCES Failer, K.C. (1996). Evaluating children suspected of having been sexually abused. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Gardner, R. A. (1995). Protocols for the sex-abuse evaluation. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics. HMSO (1994). Memorandum of good practice. London, UK: Author. Jaudes, P., & Martone, M. (1992). Interdisciplinary of alleged sexual abuse cases. Pediatrics, 89, 1164-1168. Lau, E. (July and August 1996). Statistics on sexual offenders, June 1994. Hong Kong: Lady Trench Training Centre. Mak, J. (1990). Social work training in the 1990s. Welfare Digest, 195(8), 1-2. Sing Pao (January 16, 1994). Editorial: Be aware of the increase of child sexual abuse cases in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Sing Pao Daily News. Slicner, N. A., & Hanson, S. R. (1989). Guidelines for videotape interviews in child sexual abuse cases. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 7( 1 ), 61-74. Social Welfare Department (SWD) (1996). Statistics on established child sexual abuse cases including SWD and NGOs, 1993-1995. Hong Kong: Author. Stevenson, K. M., Leung, P., & Cheung, K. M. (1992). Competency-based evaluation of interviewing skills in child sexual abuse cases. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 28(3), 11-16. Tedesco, J., & Schnell, S. (1987). Children's reactions to sex abuse investigations and litigation. Child Abuse & Neglect, 11, 22-30. Working Group on Child Abuse (1996). Procedures for handing child sexual abuse cases. Hong Kong: Author.
Rrsumr----French abstract not available at time of publication, but will be published in a later issue of the Journal. Resumen--Se disefiaron una serie de programas de entrenarniento para trabajadores sociales, oficiales de polic~a y psicologos clinicos en Hong Kong, enfocando destrezas para hacer preguntas culturalmente adecuadas y grabaeiones en video de entrevistas sobre casos de abuso sexual en la nifiez. E1 an~ilisis de contenido de las 74 entrevistas que incluian juego de roles sobre videos de investigaciones revelaron 119 preguntas y afirmaciones que fueron evaluadas por esos profesionales y su instructor como trcnicas utiles para entrevistar ni~os(as) con sospecha de haber sido abusados sexualmente. A pesar de que cada profesional entrevistaba al ni~o(a) victima con un esfilo t~nico, todos encontraron que en un proceso de investigacion, al desempefiar sus funciones de protecci6n, evaluaci6n y recolecci6n de pruebas, el aspecto m~s importante era mantener una perspectiva balanceada.
APPENDIX
1: P R O T O C O L
FOR
VIDEOTAPING
STAGE I. RAPPORT Set the Stage Monitor's Introduction Interviewer's Identity Explain the Purpose and Process Explain Confidentiality and Care of Tape Obtain Child's Consent Allow Child to Ask Questions Establish Rapport and Child's Competency Child's Name Age Date of Birth Grade and Favorite Subjects Favorite Places & TV Programs Family Members at Home
INTERVIEWS
280
K. M. Cheung
Explain the Ground Rules Differentiation between Truth and Lies, Facts and Fantasies Understanding the Importance of Telling the Truth and Facts Acceptability of Saying "I don't k n o w " or "I don't understand"
STAGE II. FREE NARRATIVE A C C O U N T Encourage Child to Give an Account in Own Words
STAGE III. QUESTIONING
4WH of Last Incident What Happened Who Was Involved Where Did it Happen When Did it Happen How Did it Happen
Also Consider Who Else Was Present Frequency Duration Method(s) & Progression of Abuse Secrecy & Coercion Who Else Knows
Remember: Clarify the child's terminology and use the child's language to ask questions.
STAGE IV. CLOSING THE INTERVIEW
Brief Summary (Important Information Only) Answer Questions From Child Comfort and Thank Child Report Closure Time
APPENDIX CONDUCTING
THE
2:
VIDEO-RECORDED
INTERVIEW
STAGE I. RAPPORT
Monitor's Announcement (in Front of the Camera) " M y name is _ _ (name) of (department), I will be recording the entire process of this interview in the monitor room. Today is _ _ (date). Now is _ _ a.m/pm. This is the interviewing suite of the Police Force. The interviewer, _ _ (name and position of interviewer) and a _ _ year-old child _ _ (name) will be coming in shortly."
Introduction by the Interviewer 1. "Please come in. Have a seat here." 2. " M y name is ~ . I am a social worker/police officer/clinical psychologist. Do you know what social workers/police officers/clinical psychologists do?" 3. "Yes, we help people/catch thieves/do assessments. We also talk with children and try to help them. (Pause
Video-recorded interviews in child sexual abuse
281
and allow the child to ask questions about you). Let's take a look at this room. This room has two cameras. W e are going to videotape our conversations so that I don't have to write down everything and can concentrate on what you will say. O K ? " 4. " T h i s videotape will be handled by an experienced police officer. After we finish talking, the tape will be locked in a secure place. It will only be used when it is assessed to be appropriate. Nobody will watch it without our permission." 5. "Ms./Mr. (police/social worker) will be monitoring the cameras. Your (relative) will be sitting in the waiting area *watching us through a television." (*only if requested by the child and his/her relative). 6. " D o you have any questions about this room? (wait for the child's response). If not, we will continue videotaping, OK?
Rapport Building and Child's Competency to Answer Questions 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.
" W h a t is your n a m e ? " " W h a t do your friends call y o u ? " " M a y I call you " " H o w old are you?" " W h e n is your birthday?" " W h a t grade are you in?" " W h a t do you like most at school?" " W h a t time do you go home from school?" " W h a t is your favorite color/fruit/TV program?" " W h o lives at home? Tell me their names." " W h o helps you with your homework?" " W h o is your best friend?" " W h o else do you like to play with?" " H o w did you come here today?"
Explain the Ground Rules Truth & Lies 21. "Today, you and I are going to talk about something that is very important. Before we begin, I need to know that you understand the difference between telling the truth and telling a lie." Direct Approach (for older children): 22. "Tell me in your own words what the word " t r u t h " means." 23. "Tell me what a lie means to y o u . " Conceptual Approach: 24. Give an example of a lie and check for competency: "Is it raining inside this r o o m ? " (child answers " y e s " or " n o " ) " I f I said, it's raining in this room, would that be the truth or a lie?" 25. If the child does not answer, ask the question in a different way: "Did I tell you a fact or is it a fantasy (or, did I make it u p ) ? " 26. Also give an example of the truth and check for competency: " W h a t color is my jacket?" (child answers) " I f I said, I ' m wearing a red jacket, would that be the truth or a lie?" 27. If the child is unable to differentiate between the truth and a lie, the interviewer should make an attempt to define the difference in simple terms such as: " T h e truth is something that really happened. It represents the fact. Lies are things that don't really happen, things or fantasies that are made up."
Acceptability of Saying "I don't know" or "1 don't understand" 28. " I f you really don't know the answer to my question, it's OK to say 'I don't know' and when you don't understand m y question, say 'I don't understand' and I will ask the question in a different way."
Conclusion 29. "Everything we talk about today must be only the truth, nothing made up or pretended. Also, don't leave anything out. O K ? "
282
K. M. Cheung
STAGE II. FREE NARRATIVE A C C O U N T 30. " N o w tell me what happened."
STAGE III. QUESTIONING
Trigger Questions (if Child is Reticent) 31. 32. 33. 34.
" W h y are you here today?" " Y o u appear to be upset. Tell me what happened." "Earlier today at school, you told (someone) that something happened to you. Tell me about that." If the child is reluctant to tell, use the following questions: "I received a phone call (or report) that something has happened and I would like to be able to help. I first need to know, in your own words, exactly what has happened?" 35. "Has anyone done something to you that you should tell?" 36. " H a s anyone told you to keep a secret?" 37. Clarify the child's terminology and use the child's language to ask questions. Avoid using questions such as " D o you r e m e m b e r . . . " or " C a n you tell m e . . . " that the child can simply answer " y e s " or " n o " to avoid answering the second part of the question.
Detailed Information of the Most Recent Incident: What (General Questioning) 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44.
" W h a t happened?" "Tell me more about that." "Tell me the most recent incident." " G o on." " W h a t else happened?" " W h a t happened next?" " Y o u said that daddy did something bad. Tell me what daddy did."
Where 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54.
" Y o u said something happened when m o m m y was not home. Which home are you referring to?" "Where were you when your daddy touched y o u ? " " Y o u said it was at home. What is the address of your h o m e ? " " H o w many rooms does your house/apartment have?" " W h i c h room were you in when your daddy touched you?" " W h o s e bedroom was it?" "Describe what was inside that room." " W h e n you stepped in this place, what did you see?" "How did you go to this place?" " Y o u said that Uncle T o m lives on the third floor of an apartment building. Was it anything such as a number posted on the apartment door?"
Who 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63.
" W h o is Uncle T o m ? " " W h a t is Uncle T o m ' s full n a m e ? " " H o w long have you known h i m ? " "Where does Uncle Tom live?" " W h i c h teacher did you say put his hand in your pants?" " W h a t is your music teacher's n a m e ? " "Is your music teacher a man or w o m a n ? " "How old is h e / s h e ? " "Describe how he/she looks."
When 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.
" W h e n did it happen?" (Check time and date) " Y o u said you were watching TV when it happened. Tell me what was on TV at that time." " Y o u said you couldn't remember the date. Did you go to school that day?" " W h a t did you do at school that day?" " Y o u said it happened the night before. Today is (date), what date was 'the night before'?" " W a s it dark outside or was it daylight?" " Y o u said you were sleeping when your uncle came in. What time did you go to bed that day?"
Video-recorded interviews in child sexual abuse
283
How (Follow-up Questions to Investigate Specific Details) 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101.
"You said it was dark in the room, how did you know it was Uncle Tom?" "You said he said something to you and you recognized it was Uncle Tom, what did he say?" "How did he make you 'uncomfortable'?" "What did your uncle touch you with?" "You said he put something in your bottom part. What is your "bottom part"?" "Tell me another name for "sh-sh." " "What does your morn/dad call "the under"?" "What were you wearing when he touched you?" "What was your uncle wearing when he touched you?" "How did your daddy touch your bottom part with your pants on?" "You said Uncle Tom put his pee-pee in your mouth. Did he say anything before/when/after he did that?" "When he put his pee-pee in your mouth, what did you see?" "Describe his pee-pee." "What else did you see?" "What happened to him after he touched his private in front of you?" "What did you feel when he put something in your behind?" "How did he move his body?" "You said he shook his body, show me how he did." "How many times did he shake?" "How long did it last?" "How much time did he spend with you?" "You said he gave you some toilet paper to wipe yourself, where did you wipe?" "After you wiped yourself, what did you see on the toilet paper?" "Where did you put the toilet paper?" "You said you felt something wet on your bottom, did you see what that was?" "You said the "candy" from his pee-pee tasted really bad, what did you do with it?" "Where did you spit it?" "What color was it?" "What was the smell?" "Did he do anything else to you?" "What did he say afterward?"
Coercion/Secrecy 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107.
"What else did he do (or say) when he put his pee-pee in your mouth?" "You said he pushed you against the wall and made you kneel down. How did he make you kneel down?" "Which hand did he use to grasp your shoulder?" (Child answers) "What did he do with the other hand?" "Before Uncle Tom left your bedroom (wiped your legs, etc.), did he say anything?" "Who else knew about what you've just told me?" "When you told your morn about this, what did she say?"
Who Else 108. "Who else was in the bedroom when Uncle Tom came in?" 109. "Who else was in the house/apartment when this happened?" 110. "You mentioned your brother was also in the bedroom, did he say anything at that time? . . . . How about afterwards, did he say anything to you?"
Progression ofAbuse 111. 112. 113. 114.
"What else happened?" "Did this kind of thing happen in the past?" "How many times did it happen?" "Tell me what happened in the first time." (Focus on the 4WH questions for the first incidence after asking questions of the most recent incidence.)
STAGE IV. CLOSING THE INTERVIEW
Brief Summary 115. "You just told me that daddy touched your pee-pee and you were scared to tell. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?"
284
K . M . Cheung
Answer Questions From ChiM: 116. "I have asked you a lot of questions today. Do you have any questions you would like to ask m e ? "
Comfort and Thank Child 117. "I know this may have been difficult for you to talk about. Thank you very much for telling me about it." 118. " Y o u seem to be anxious to go. But before we go, I would like to thank you for coming." 119. "I want you to know that I will try to help you to go through this process. If you later have any questions for me, please let me know. I will leave m y phone number to you (or relative for a young child). Thank you for coming."
Report Closure Time (for a Formal Closure) "This interview with (child's name) ends at (time). We can go now."
