Open AccessThe testimony of a minor: when does a procedural truth correspond to a historical truth?
Author(s) -
Luisa Marra
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
rivista di psicopatologia forense, medicina legale, criminologia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2610-9018
DOI - 10.4081/psyco.2019.63
Subject(s) - minor (academic) , nothing , witness , compromise , psychology , subject (documents) , discretion , suggestibility , quality (philosophy) , casual , social psychology , epistemology , sexual abuse , set (abstract data type) , law , poison control , computer science , political science , philosophy , human factors and ergonomics , medicine , medical emergency , library science , programming language
The child abuse in its various forms, physical, sexual and psychological violence, is a complex phenomenon, potentially able to alter not only the natural development of the subject abused, but also his ability to relate to others. This paper aims to point out the way that the child has to take from the moment he decided to take over being a victim of abuse at the time when it is called to testify about the abuse right away, with all the difficulties that this witness implies, not only for the child himself, but also for those who are called upon to decide and rule on the quality of that testimony. The art. 196 of the current Code of Criminal Procedure recognizes everyone the ability to testify, then, including minors. Nothing therefore prevents the operators from taking information from a child in criminal trials. Moreover, investigators have wide discretion not only "if" hearing the minor, but also on the methods to do it. This entails serious risks on the authenticity of the evidential result: mnestic lability, suggestibility, tendency to pander to the interlocutor's expectations, all of which are typical factors of the minor that can compromise the correct reconstruction of the facts.