NCJ Number
162994
Journal
Seton Hall Law Review Volume: 26 Issue: 2 Dated: (1996) Pages: 685-763
Date Published
1996
Length
79 pages
Annotation
This article examines the effects on the presumption of authenticity of the child witness of a New Jersey Supreme Court decision providing for the exclusion of child witness testimony in criminal trials.
Abstract
The evidentiary rule was promulgated in response to a child sexual abuse trial in which a young woman was convicted of 115 counts of aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, terroristic threats, and endangering the welfare of a minor. The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, reversed the conviction on the grounds that the State's expert testimony had exceeded its permissible scope, the use of closed-circuit television testimony by the children was improper, and pretrial interviews were unduly suggestive and created a substantial risk of tainting the children's statements. This article seeks to demonstrate that the New Jersey taint rule creates a new evidentiary barrier incompatible with legal doctrine, effectively overruling the State's competency doctrine. The article: (1) argues that implicit throughout constitutional structure of the adversary system is a strong presumption of authenticity which is consistent with an irrebuttable pretrial presumption of authenticity; (2) sets forth extralegal arguments against the New Jersey rule; and (3) concludes that child witnesses should enjoy a strong presumption of authenticity. Footnotes