Sexual abuse investigations often hinge on child’s statement

Monday, Dec. 1, 1997 | 10:36 a.m.

Since there are no visible signs of child sexual abuse in at least 75 percent of suspected cases, the investigation often boils down to the youngster's statement.

Local investigators typically use anatomically correct drawings of adults and juveniles as they question the child suspected of being abused. There also is a medical exam.

Clark County Family & Youth Services caseworker Mark Fitzgerald says chances are that a child already has told his story to someone else, such as a teacher.

"A lot of interviews start with rapport building, and then you go into what happened," he says. "If you know a parent caused a bruise, you ask how the parent caused it."

Most examinations of potential child sexual abuse are performed by the county's Sexual Abuse Investigative Team in its offices at Child Haven. The children are greeted in a toy-filled play area. Older kids are shown a cartoon-like program that explains the medical procedure. The exam takes about 15 minutes.

Some parents complain the exam frightens and traumatizes their children. But team coordinator Pat Thacker says the procedure, which includes a video colposcopy, is noninvasive and doesn't hurt the children. Many times a parent or other relative will be allowed to witness the exam if he/she is not the suspected perpetrator.

Medical practitioners perform the exams on a part-time basis. Four years ago, the county advertised throughout the West for a full-time examiner but there were no applicants.

Forensic evidence is turned over to law enforcement authorities for potential prosecution.

About 85 percent of the children examined are girls; the most common age group is 5 to 9.

Some parents claim investigators ask children leading questions to implicate the father or mother. But investigators say they sometimes must ask questions that appear leading based on evidence or previous statements.

"We're aware that defense attorneys will attack our interviews as being leading," says Metro Sgt. Ralph Hemmington, head of the child sexual abuse detail. "Questions will depend on what information you have at hand. You'll ask who was in the room with them. If they say 'John,' you would then ask, 'what did John do to you?'

"Sometimes, depending on how a child is answering, you may have to get more direct. Try to get away from 'yes, no.' Descriptive answers are more credible."

Sandie Durgin, supervisor of Metro's physical abuse/neglect unit, agrees that it's easy to get a child to say whatever the questioner wants to hear. However, she adds, "if you cannot learn how not to lead the child, you cannot be in this detail."

"We do not want to put words in a child's mouth."

Children will sometimes answer what they think the caseworker wants to hear, says Clark County Family Court Judge Terrance Marren.

Salt Lake City consultant Bruce Giffen, who evaluates child sexual abuse cases for Las Vegas attorney Robert Glennon and other lawyers, says interviewers are too often swayed by the youngster's behavior.

"You can't use behaviors because they're so broad that they're not specific to sexual abuse," he says. "Just because a child wets a bed or uses foul language, a child who has never been abused may do those same things."

The interviewer should focus on the alleged abuse incident without unduly influencing the child, Giffen says.

"There are ways to guide the child into making a free account of what happened to him or her. It's important that the interviewer not interfere with what the child has to say so as not to contaminate the interview," he says. "I would need as much descriptive quality about the actual abuse incident as I could get."

Giffen also believes statements from alleged victims of child sexual abuse should be videotaped and gleaned by specially trained interviewers working with the case investigator. Florida and Idaho use videotape. In Salt Lake City, children are interviewed at the Children's Justice Center, which has built-in video cameras.

Marren says videotaping is a good idea.

Metro Police have video equipment but normally doesn't use it for such interviews. Caseworkers don't videotape at all.

"Would seeing that videotape really make you believe I didn't spend an hour beforehand coaching the child?" caseworker Peggy Rowe asks.

Giffen deflects such criticism by saying a trained interviewer can detect coaching. But local investigators, who conduct many of their interviews at a child's home, school or hospital, argue that using video cameras can also be problematic.

"We can do audio taping anywhere but we are not always in an environment where we can videotape," Hemmington says. "It's distracting and it's cumbersome. Children also don't always remain set in one location. They move around."