This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Identifying Coached or Psychologically Coerced Children'.












Scottish 
Court Service
Guidance on Joint investiGative 
interviewinG of child witnesses 
in scotland
© Crown Copyright 2011
APS Group Scotland 
195872 12/11
w w w . s c o t l a n d . g o v . u k

Guidance on Joint investiGative 
interviewinG of child witnesses 
in scotland

© Crown copyright 2011
You may re-use this information (excluding logos and images) free of charge in any 
format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this 
licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/  
or e-mail: xxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xxx.xx.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to 
obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This document is available from our website at www.scotland.gov.uk.
The Scottish Government
St Andrew’s House
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
ISBN: 978-1-78045-591-4
Produced for the Scottish Government by APS Group Scotland
DPPAS12118 (12/11)
Published by the Scottish Government, December 2011

ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 
ACPOS 
 
Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland 
ADSW 
 
Association of Directors of Social Work 
COPFS 
 
Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service 
DPA    
 
Data Protection Act 1998 
ESDU  
 
Electronic Service Delivery Unit (SCS) 
GIRFEC 
 
Getting it Right for Every Child 
GPMS  
 
Government Protective Marking Scheme 
JII 
  Joint 
investigative 
interview 
JIIT   
 
Joint investigative interview training 
NICHD 
 
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 
NSG 
  National 
Steering 
Group 
PF 
  Procurator 
Fiscal 
SCRA 
  Scottish 
Children’s Reporter Administration 
SCS 
  Scottish 
Court 
Service 
SE 
Scottish Executive; the name of the Scottish Government during 
the research period; references to the Executive are retained 
throughout 
SG 
  Scottish 
Government 
SPR 
  Standard 
prosecution 
report 
(and SPR2) which the police  
 
 
 
complete 
SW 
  Social 
work 
 
VWA   
 
Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2    
 
  

link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 13 link to page 15 link to page 16 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 24 link to page 25 link to page 26 link to page 27 link to page 29 link to page 30 link to page 31 link to page 32 link to page 33 link to page 34 link to page 35 link to page 40 link to page 41 link to page 42 link to page 44 link to page 45 link to page 46 link to page 49 link to page 50 link to page 51  
GUIDANCE ON JOINT INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEWING OF 
CHILD WITNESSES IN SCOTLAND  
 
CONTENTS 

   
  
PAGE 
PART 1:  INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 6 
Investigative interviewing ........................................................................................ 7 
The decision to carry out a joint investigative interview .......................................... 9 
Overview of the joint investigative interview process .............................................. 9 
Recording the interview .......................................................................................... 9 

PART 2:  PLANNING THE INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW ..................................... 11 
Key points for planning ......................................................................................... 11 
Purpose of the interview ....................................................................................... 13 
Timing of the interview ..........................................................................................  14 
Number and duration of interviews ....................................................................... 15 
What consent is needed? .................................................................................. 16 
The lead and second interviewers (including switching roles) .............................. 16 
The presence of a ‘support person’ at interview ................................................... 18 
Interview that does not produce relevant information ........................................... 20 
PART 3:  CONDUCTING THE JOINT INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW .................... 22 
Implications of visual recording for conducting the interview ................................ 22 
Immediately pre-interview ..................................................................................... 23 
The phases of the interview .................................................................................. 23 
Introductions and explaining purpose ................................................................... 24 
Interview atmosphere ........................................................................................... 25 
Interview principles ............................................................................................... 27 
Telling the truth ..................................................................................................... 28 
Rapport; establishing a ‘child-centred’ interview ................................................... 29 
Undertaking a practice interview ...........................................................................  29 
Raising topic of concern ....................................................................................... 30 
Free narrative ....................................................................................................... 31 
Prompts ................................................................................................................ 32 
Questioning .......................................................................................................... 33 
Props .................................................................................................................... 38 
Closure ................................................................................................................. 39 
Action immediately afterwards: Creating the recording log ................................... 39 
Debriefing and further interviews .......................................................................... 40 
PART 4:  ADDITIONAL SUPPORT NEEDS  
 
42   
Disabilities and illnesses………………………………………………………………..42 
Very young children .............................................................................................. 43 
When the child’s first language is not English ....................................................... 43 
Ethnicity ................................................................................................................ 44 
Planning an interview for a child with additional support needs ............................ 44 

PART 5:  COMPLICATING FACTORS ................................................................... 47 
When the child witness becomes a suspect ......................................................... 47 
Multiple witnesses/suspects ................................................................................. 48 
Institutional abuse ................................................................................................. 48 
Children who may have been coached before interview ....................................... 49 
Children trafficked or refugee/unaccompanied asylum seeking children .............. 49 
Lengthy time-lapse ............................................................................................... 49 



link to page 52 link to page 53 link to page 54 link to page 55 link to page 56 link to page 57 link to page 58 link to page 60 link to page 62 link to page 63 link to page 64 link to page 65 link to page 67 link to page 68 link to page 71 link to page 73 link to page 75 link to page 76 link to page 77 link to page 79  
Family and community loyalty ...............................................................................  50 
PART 6:  USE OF AND AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR VISUAL 
RECORDINGS
 ......................................................................................................... 51 

Handling and copying recordings……………………………………………………...51  
Points of principle ................................................................................................. 52 
Practice to be followed .......................................................................................... 52 
Requests to view recordings .................................................................................  53 
Viewing of recordings ........................................................................................... 53 
Precognition ..........................................................................................................  53 
Copies of recordings held by other agencies ........................................................ 54 
Family life concerns .............................................................................................. 54 
Use of recordings by the Children’s Reporter ....................................................... 54 
Adjudication .......................................................................................................... 55 
Using the recordings for other child protection purposes or other court proceedings
.............................................................................................................................. 55 
Transcription ......................................................................................................... 55 
Using recordings in court ...................................................................................... 56 
PART 7: REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING .............................................. 58 
Reviews of the literature ....................................................................................... 58 
Scottish legislation ................................................................................................ 60 
Scottish policy documents .................................................................................... 60 
Scottish guidance ................................................................................................. 61 
Research and review reports ................................................................................ 62 
England and Wales guidance ............................................................................... 63 
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................... 65 
APPENDIX A:  Quick Guide: Conducting the investigative interview ................ 66 
APPENDIX B:  Briefing and Debriefing - role of Supervisors and Managers 69 
APPENDIX C:  Benefits of visually recording the interview ............................... 71 
APPENDIX D   Information leaflet on consent ..................................................... 73 
APPENDIX E:  Consent form ................................................................................. 74 
APPENDIX F:  Accommodation and technical specification .............................. 75 
APPENDIX G:  Restricted Media handling and storage ...................................... 77 
 
 
 
 

 
 4
 


 
Ministerial Foreword 
 
The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that the justice and children’s 
hearings systems develop in a way that keeps pace with modern life and ensures 
appropriate support is in place for victims and witnesses to allow them to participate 
effectively in the process.  It is widely recognised that child victims and witnesses 
can be particularly vulnerable, especially in the circumstances which lead to a joint 
investigative interview being necessary.  When gathering information from children, 
who are often already extremely traumatised, we must ensure the interview is as 
child-focused and stress-free as possible.     
 
Guidance on Interviewing Child Witnesses in Scotland was published in 2003.  Since 
then, On the Record, an independent evaluation of two police and social work-led 
pilots undertaking visually recorded joint investigative interviews, established that 
there is no good reason why the majority of such interviews with children should not 
be visually recorded.   To maintain momentum, the Scottish Government set up a 
multi-agency National Strategic Group to: revise the guidance to include visual 
recording of interviewspurchase and roll-out visual recording equipment; and 
consider training requirements.  
 
The work to introduce and develop visual recording of joint investigative interviews  
with child witnesses complements our ongoing work to support child and other 
vulnerable witnesses to give their best evidence, and the National Guidance for Child 
Protection in Scotland 
which was launched on 13 December 2010.  In particular, 
visually recorded accounts from child witness can be used as prior statements, an 
alternative way in which vulnerable children in the most serious cases can give their 
main evidence. 
 
The revised Guidance on Joint Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses in 
Scotland
 also promotes the latest best practice for police and social work 
practitioners undertaking JIIs with children.  It makes clear that every decision made 
about interviewing a child must be made on the basis that the paramount 
consideration is the best interests of the child.  The guidance continues to be based 
on the principle that every child has the right to protection from harm, abuse and 
exploitation.  In the words of Kofi Annan:  
 
“There is no trust more sacred than the one the world holds with children. There is 
no duty more important than ensuring that their rights are respected, that their 
welfare is protected, that their lives are free from fear and want and
 that they can 
grow up in peace”.  
 
I firmly endorse this guidance as a step towards achieving that and would like to 
extend my thanks to all the agencies and individuals who have worked tirelessly, in 
partnership with the Scottish Government, in producing the revised guidance.  
 
 
KENNY MACASKILL, MSP 
Cabinet Secretary for Justice 
 
 5
 

 
 
PART 1:  INTRODUCTION 
 
1. 
This good practice guidance is for police officers and social workers who are 
carrying out joint investigative interviews (JIIs) with children (aged under 16 
on commencement of the initial interview).  Its principles may also be relevant 
to organisations whose staff (e.g. Procurators Fiscal precognition officers) are 
involved in interviewing children.  The guidance may also be useful as an 
approach to interviewing persons who are being treated as vulnerable adult 
witnesses under the provisions of the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 
2004 (VWA), and people aged 16 and 17 years old who are subject to 
supervision requirements in terms of section 70 of the Children (Scotland) Act 
1995. 
 
2. 
This guidance updates previous interviewing guidance (Scottish Executive, 
2003) and incorporates guidance on visual recording of JIIs, based on 
unpublished draft guidance (Richards et al, 2006) and on piloting in 3 areas 
already using visual recording.  It should also be read in conjunction with the 
National Child Protection Guidance which embeds the ‘Getting it Right For 
Every Child’ (GIRFEC) approach. 
 
3. 
The premise of this guidance remains that every child has a right to protection 
from harm, abuse and exploitation.  Where a child may have suffered such 
treatment, and agencies involved in child protection are called to intervene, 
the child’s welfare should be of paramount importance.  Under GIRFEC, the 
interests of other children should also be considered.  From the outset, every 
decision made about interviewing the child must be made on the basis that 
the paramount consideration is the best interests of the child.  Care must be 
taken that children do not suffer any undue distress during investigations into 
allegations or reported information.  Agencies should also endeavour to treat 
children as individuals, and where possible, involve them in making decisions.  
These principles are founded on the United Nations Convention on the Rights 
of the Child 1989, and the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.  
 
4. 
This guidance aims to make the interview more child-focused and less 
stressful for the child. It also aims to: 
 
•  improve the quality of investigative interviews 
•  enhance the sharing of information 
•  improve the quality of the interview record  
•  keep to a minimum the number of times the child is interviewed, in the best 
interests of the child 
•  set out principles of good practice for any organisations who may be involved 
in interviewing children as  witnesses, whether as part of a criminal, civil or 
children’s hearing related proceedings  
•  set out good practice for the visual recording of JIIs. 
 
 
 6
 

 
 
5. 
The main changes are: 
 
•  Introduction of visual recording (paragraphs 18-20) 
•  Clarification of consent (paragraphs 41-44)  
•  Role of 2nd interviewer (paragraphs 45-53) 
• Pre-interview 
transportation (paragraph 76) 
•  Clarification of ground rules - now Interview principles (paragraphs 97-99) 
•  Removal of truth and lies (paragraphs 100-102) 
•  Greater prominence to practice interview  (paragraphs 107-108)  
 
Other minor changes have also been made to the guidance. 
 
6. 
The guidance covers all JII cases regardless of the allegation under 
investigation, including child sexual abuse, physical and emotional abuse.  It 
illustrates best practice for conducting JIIs, to ensure that the interview record 
is of a quality that can be used during any subsequent proceedings, including 
as evidence in court if necessary.  (The guidance does not cover interviews 
with children who are suspects; see paragraphs 185-188) 
 
7. 
This guidance underpins and supplements the provision and content of Joint 
Investigative Interviewing Training (JIIT) and complies with the revised (2009) 
National Curriculum on Joint Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses 
Training in Scotland
.  Work is ongoing in moving towards a training and 
development strategy which will set out national standards of practice and 
consideration of competence and accreditation issues.  Some agreement has 
been reached and we are now progressing towards the agenda being taken 
forward in the future by relevant bodies (Association of Directors of Social 
Work (ADSW), Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland (ACPOS) etc.). 
Investigative interviewing 
8. 
This guidance is concerned primarily with the formal interviews carried out by 
investigative interviewers, mainly for evidential purposes and to assess any 
necessary action in relation to that or any other child.  The investigative 
interview is a formal, planned interview with a child, carried out by staff 
trained and competent to conduct it, for the purposes of eliciting the child’s 
account of events (if any) which require investigation.  It is important to bear 
in mind that interviewers must always be objective as, at the time of interview, 
it will not be known what proceedings, if any, the interview may be used in i.e. 
criminal, civil or both.  
 
9. 
The main purposes of the investigative interview are to: 
 
•  learn the child’s account of the circumstances that prompted the enquiry 
•  gather information to permit decision making on whether the child in question, 
or any other child, is in need of protection 
•  gather sufficient evidence to suggest whether a crime may have been 
committed against the child or anyone else  
 
 7
 

 
•  gather evidence which may lead to a ground of referral to a children’s hearing 
being established.  
 
10.  Although children may first approach and communicate with those people 
who are around them daily (e.g. teachers, parents), these discussions are not 
to be confused with the JII.  Police officers who are not trained in joint 
investigative interviewing may also be the first to talk to a child, and their 
interaction with the child should also be regarded as quite different from the 
JII.   
 
11.  Similarly, a child may reveal incidents, such as sexual or physical abuse 
unexpectedly during counselling or assessment sessions held to address 
other issues (e.g. behavioural problems the child has been displaying at 
school).  Discussions within these settings should not be confused with 
investigative interviews.  In such circumstances, the child should be allowed 
to provide any voluntary account, however, should not be interviewed or 
questioned in detail by the professional as this may undermine the reliability 
or admissibility of any information subsequently provided at interview. 
 
12.  Details of any revelations made to a police officer should be noted in the 
officer’s personal notebook, as soon as practicably thereafter any 
corroborating officer or social worker should be required to countersign it.  In 
the event that the revelation is not made in the presence of a police officer, 
the social worker or other professional should record details of what was said 
by the child, those persons present and the time, date and location in written 
format as soon as reasonably practicable and the police notified as soon as 
possible thereafter to enable child protection procedures to be considered 
and implemented if necessary. 
 
13.  Nor should JIIs be confused with interviews conducted for therapeutic 
purposes.  Therapy-focused interviews must be undertaken with care to 
ensure as far as possible that they do not compromise the investigative 
function; therefore a therapy-focused approach (e.g. clinical approach to 
interviewing) should not be adopted during an investigative interview.  The 
provision of therapeutic support can, however, be an important part of the 
response to child physical or sexual abuse.  Guidance on how to provide 
therapeutic support without potentially contaminating evidence is given in the 
Code of Practice to facilitate the provision of therapeutic support to child 
witnesses in court proceedings
 (Scottish Executive, 2005a).  

 
14. Nevertheless, 
the 
manner 
in which an investigative interview is conducted is 
likely to have an impact on the child and their capacity to begin to overcome 
any adverse events or experiences.  Interviewers should always be aware of 
the potential effects of their techniques and use this guidance as appropriate 
to minimise adverse affects on the child.  
 
 
 8
 

 
The decision to carry out a joint investigative interview 
15. The 
National Child Protection Guidance makes clear that any notification of 
concern must result in the consideration of relevant information and indicate a 
need to make decisions on a number of issues.  One of these is whether a 
joint investigative interview is required and, if so, the arrangements that need 
to be put in place.      
 
16.  On receipt of information indicating that a child has suffered or may be at risk 
of abuse or neglect, information should be gathered from all relevant 
agencies who know the child and/or the child’s parents or carers, including 
any relevant health or education information and information from any adult 
services involved.  Where it is decided by police and social work that a child 
protection response is required health colleagues must be involved in any 
decisions about the health needs of the child.  Managers with designated 
responsibility will be responsible for planning, co-ordinating and liaising on 
any joint investigation and interview.  There may be occasions an immediate 
risk is identified and there will be a need to make dynamic and quick time 
decisions based on the information available. Interviewers should be aware of 
and follow the National Child Protection Guidance 
 
Overview of the joint investigative interview process 
17.  A joint investigative interview process will include:- 
•  Pre-interview briefing meeting to plan the approach to the investigation, 
and to ensure that those who undertake the interview are fully aware of all 
the issues; 
•  The investigative interview, including a practice interview (paragraphs 107-
108), involving police and social work staff; 
•  A de-briefing meeting to allow those involved to fully explore and access 
the information elicited during the interview. 
 
Recording the interview 
18.  Best practice is that when it has been decided that a JII is appropriate, the 
vast majority of such interviews carried out will be visually recorded.  
Appendix C sets out the benefits of visual recording.  Where equipment is 
available, all JIIs must be visually recorded unless there are specific reasons 
why this may be inappropriate e.g. the alleged offence involved video-
recording or photography of the victim.  If interviews have to take place on an 
emergency basis and recording equipment is not available or able to be used, 
then the interview should be recorded in a hand written format.  The 
questions and answers noted verbatim.  In all cases, the date, start and end 
times must be noted in the interview record(s).  The practice interview 
(following on from rapport building) should also be recorded (see paragraphs 
107-108); paragraphs 80 and 88 may also have implications for what is 
recorded.  
 
 
 9
 

 
19.  The use of visual recordings needs to be balanced by firm reassurances to 
children and parents or carers that all recordings will be safely and 
appropriately used, stored and disposed of in accordance with police and 
local authority policies.  Guidance on copying visual recordings is set out in 
paragraphs 205-212, the accommodation and technical standards expected 
for operating JII equipment are at Appendix F while Appendix G outlines the 
rules for handling and storage of data with a restricted classification.  
 
20.  Where a JII is not visually recorded, the reason for not visually recording the 
interview must be documented in case files and verified by an agency 
supervisor.   
 
 
10
 

 
PART 2:  PLANNING THE INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW 
 

21.  The police and social work services are responsible for the planning and 
conduct of JIIs (see paragraph 16).  The decision as to how to conduct the 
interview (the Interview Plan) will be made by the interviewers following 
detailed briefing by a relevant supervising officer from either the police or 
social work service.  It is extremely important to plan the interview properly 
and, while there may be time limitations in exceptional circumstances, the 
best interest and needs of the child must always be the overriding principle. 
Appendix B provides an overview on the role of supervisors and managers in 
briefing and debriefing practitioners.   
 
22.  The briefing of interviewers is an essential part of the investigative planning 
process since it requires a supervising officer from either the police or the 
social work service to provide the interviewers with all detailed information 
gathered to that point and leading to the decision to conduct a joint 
investigative interview.  This information is crucial to the development of an 
Interview Plan and to maintaining proper focus on the matter under 
investigation and the needs and interests of the child.  The inter-agency 
planning process will decide which officer of the relevant service will conduct 
the briefing.  That officer will then carry out a proper briefing, preferably in 
person, with the allocated interviewers.  The briefing will take place as soon 
as possible after the joint decision meeting has decided that a JII is required 
and always before the JII takes place. 
 
23.  A planning meeting (called a pre-interview briefing in some areas) involving 
those allocated the task of conducting the JII prior to the interview is 
essential.  This can be done either face to face or by telephone and has 
several benefits, enabling interviewers to:  
 
•  discuss the needs of the child (see part 4 on additional support needs) and/or 
any complicating factors in the case (see part 5 on complicating factors) 
•  agree on the interview location – subject to consultation with the child and 
carer – and the procedure, recording of interview details, and the roles and 
responsibilities of each interviewer 
•  allow for speedier and more informed progress in the investigation since risk 
assessments can be carried out together and reduce the number of interviews 
that need to be conducted. 
 
24.  A detailed record should be taken of every planning meeting, in particular 
noting all decisions made, who was involved in making them and justifications 
for making them.  Copies of this record should be kept by both agencies.   
 
Key points for planning 
25.  Appendix A (Quick Guide: Conducting the investigative interview) 
summarises the issues that need to be considered when planning, conducting 
and concluding the investigative interview.  The list is not exhaustive; rather 
interviewers should view it as an aid for developing more comprehensive lists 
 
 
11
 

 
of issues to be considered when interviewing child witnesses.  Interviews 
should always be tailored to the child, and to the circumstances of the 
investigation.  Key planning points include: 
 
•  The child’s age and gender 
•  The child’s race, culture, religion, ethnicity, first language, sexual 
orientation/identity and whether an interpreter is required 
•  The child’s cognitive (e.g. attention and memory) and linguistic (e.g. 
comprehension and speech, vocabulary) abilities and range of behaviours 
•  What information the child has already provided 
•  The child’s present emotional state 
•  Any fears the child may have e.g. fears about deportation 
•  Any mental and/or physical health requirements  
•  Any mental, physical or learning impairments that require specialist 
input/attention or additional support and the potential for therapeutic support 
to influence and therefore contaminate the evidence  
• Any 
supervisor/specialist 
input that may be required 
•  Whether a support adult may need to be present and if so, who would be best 
placed to undertake this role  
•  Whether any alleged abuse involved the use of video or cameras.  (This does 
not necessarily mean that visual recording is not possible.  It does mean 
however that if the decision is taken to record, then a particularly sensitive 
approach to informing the parent and child will be necessary.) 
•  The child’s family composition and living arrangements 
•  The nature of the child’s relationships with family members and/or carers 
•  Any sources of stress for the child and/or the family (e.g. bereavement, 
marriage break-up, redundancy, house move, bullying, sickness/incapacity, 
domestic abuse) 
•  Any previous involvement with the police or local authority social work 
services – if so, the nature of such 
•  Details of previous action taken and support provided  
•  Whether the child has been subject to any medical examinations in relation to 
this, or any other, case 
•  Whether the child has been subject to any other investigations or inquiries in 
relation to this, or any other case 
•  Other sources of information (such as parents, carers, teachers, GPs, child 
psychologists) and any relevant health/medical examinations or assessments 
•  How to build rapport and undertake a practice interview 
•  Whether any drawings or other aids or props are to be used in the course of 
the interview and, if so, for what purpose 
•  Contingency plans (e.g. for retraction of earlier statement, change in lead 
interviewer, or where the child becomes a suspect during the interview as well 
as or instead of a potential witness) 
•  Any potential areas of inconsistency and how they might be addressed 
•  The need to take an overview if the case involves multiple child witnesses 
and/or multiple suspects, e.g. to have one observer common to all interviews, 
to liaise with other police forces, or obtain access to more than one 
interviewing suite 
•  Decisions about any other observers should be taken at this stage 
 
 
12
 

 
•  Whether the child has been subject to a JII in the past 
•  The other available evidence in the case 
• Timing 
• Location 
• Transportation 
arrangements 
•  Visual recording equipment availability (if mobile equipment, arrangements for 
collection 
•  Who is available to debrief the interviewer 
•  Who is available to support the child following the interview 
 
 
26.  Such factors may affect the strategy to be employed in the interview itself and 
the lines of enquiry that may be necessary to follow.  Where the investigative 
interview is undertaken as part of a criminal investigation, the investigating 
police officers should, in the first instance, consult with their supervisor or 
manager and consider whether to seek the advice of the procurator fiscal 
(PF) on any aspect of the investigative interview or the approach to be taken.   
 
27.  In particular, investigating police officers should consider the merit in seeking 
advice from the PF where they consider: 
 
•  It is necessary to seek clarification on the legal or evidential requirements 
which must be satisfied 
•  a child witness to have a mental, physical or learning impairment which may 
affect their ability to recount what occurred  
•  there is a potential requirement for the child to be seen by a relevant expert 
such as psychologist, speech language therapist etc.  
•  that records are available (such as medical records or social work records) 
which may be beneficial to the criminal investigation.  
 
Purpose of the interview 
28.  The main purposes of the Investigative Interview are set out in paragraph 9. 
The interview, generally, provides a structured opportunity for a child to give 
their account of the circumstances which prompted the attention of the 
investigating agencies.  This may involve for example, suspicion or concern 
that the child (or any other child) may be at risk of harm or have suffered 
harm.  The information the child provides will help make a decision about the 
need for protection and establish whether a crime has been committed.  
 
29.  All those involved in the investigation must also, among themselves, clarify 
and define the purpose of the specific interview(s) to be conducted and also 
the topics to be explored.  From a police perspective the purpose of the 
interview is generally to establish whether a crime may have been committed, 
and if so what evidence is available from the child.  From a social work 
perspective the purpose of the interview is generally to gather evidence to 
determine the source and level of any risk of harm the child might face and to 
 
 
13
 

 
support any necessary decisions regarding the child’s needs and any 
measures required to protect the child. 
 
30.  It is important to bear in mind that the Procurator Fiscal will be critically 
assessing the JII and looking to ensure that: the content is sufficient to 
support a charge (clarity about dates, clear about language e.g. what the 
child said and meant about body part(s) or what happened etc.); any 
discrepancies with other evidence have been explored; the JII was conducted 
in line with this guidance; and whether any gaps, inconsistencies or problems 
identified can be rectified.  
 
31.  The Children’s Reporter is also interested in the interviewed child and 
whether the events raise concerns for any other children (e.g. sibling, child 
who lives with perpetrator) and for that purpose: corroboration is not required 
(unless there is evidence that a child committed an offence in which case the 
same standard of proof required in criminal proceedings applies); there is a 
lower standard of proof (balance of probabilities); it is  not essential to prove 
who, where or even when the incident occurred.  In addition, the interview 
may provide concerns regarding the child’s care and therefore other grounds 
for referral may be considered.  As hearsay evidence is admissible in 
children’s hearings court proceedings and the evidence of the interview is 
likely to replace the child in court it may therefore be more open to challenge.  
SCRA’s policy on child witnesses states that the Reporter will not ask any 
child to give evidence in person in court where there is other evidence 
available that will satisfy a court as to the fact or facts in issue.  A crucial 
factor in this assessment will be the quality of the interview of the child. 
 
32.  It is vital that both interviewers enter the interview situation with an open mind 
and a clear view of the approach they intend to take to assist the child to give 
any account of the facts and circumstances relevant to the investigation.  
They must also be sure that interviewing the child is necessary and 
proportionate to the issues under investigation.  Naturally, there will be a 
degree of uncertainty as to what will emerge during the interview.  But by 
familiarising themselves with all the background information and taking a 
strategic approach to the interview, investigative interviewers should minimise 
the need to re-interview the child.  
 
Timing of the interview 
33.  When planning the interview, the child’s routines (e.g. mealtimes, bedtime, 
bath time) and any religious practices (e.g. prayer times, holy days, or if 
fasting) should be taken into consideration.  Interviewers may also wish to 
avoid taking children out of their school classes or from other locations where 
their removal might be conspicuous and/or cause embarrassment (e.g. youth 
or sports clubs).  It is recognised that there will be situations where this is 
unavoidable.  
 
34.  The availability of recording suite or equipment should also be a key factor in 
planning the interview.  However, in certain situations where there are clear 
 
 
14
 

 
grounds for concern over the child’s welfare and safety, it may be imperative 
to talk to the child immediately. 
 
35.  Where possible, it is beneficial for both the interviewers and the child to have 
an approximate idea of how long the interview is likely to last.  This will 
depend primarily on the child – their pace, attention span, specific needs, 
willingness to talk, etc.  
 
36.  This helps determine the pace and length of interview, and any required 
breaks in accordance with and recognising the needs of the child. 
Interviewers should never persist in interviewing a child beyond a point where 
the child is no longer capable of sustaining concentration and shows signs of 
tiredness or of being overly distressed. 
 
Number and duration of interviews 
37.  One of the major aims of the planning stage is to ensure that those 
conducting the JII are in possession of all available information which will 
allow them to elicit all requisite facts from the child, thus reducing the overall 
number of interviews conducted.  It is preferable if all the necessary 
information was gathered from just one single interview.  This is not always 
possible.  Sometimes it may take more than one interview to build rapport 
with the child or an interview may need to be terminated and rescheduled if a 
child becomes too upset (see paragraphs 155-159 on debriefing and further 
interviews).   
 
38.  Where more than one interview is to be conducted, it is important that the 
interests of justice are carefully balanced with the needs of the child, e.g. the 
emotional trauma and stress that the child may endure from repeatedly 
recalling the event(s) could have serious repercussions for their wellbeing.  
Interviewers should aim to conduct these at an appropriate time, keeping the 
child fully informed, thus reducing the child’s feelings of uncertainty. 
 
39.  Further information may come to light during the course of the enquiry which 
would necessitate a further interview of the child.  Further interviews should 
be avoided where possible.  In deciding whether a further interview is 
necessary, account should be taken of the welfare of the child, the public 
interest, (including the risk to other children) and the interests of justice.  
 
40.  Another problem interviewers must be aware of, particularly with multiple 
interviews, is that of confirmation bias; suggestions might be instilled in the 
child’s mind and then reinforced within and across interviews and 
interviewers. A biased interviewer is one who holds prior beliefs about the 
occurrence or non-occurrence of certain events.  Consequently this may 
shape the interviewer’s line of enquiry such that they obtain statements from 
witnesses that are consistent with prior beliefs (e.g. see White, Leichtman & 
Ceci, 1997).  Biased interviews are not just restricted to professionals who 
interview children but can include parents, teachers and others, such as 
interpreters or experts who are not trained/experienced in talking to children. 
 
 
15
 

 
 
What consent is needed? 

 
41.  There must be transparency in the process between interviewers and parents 
or carers when telling them about the variety and types of usage recordings 
can be put to, and who might be able to view the recordings in certain 
circumstances.  Additionally, interviewers must be aware of the differing 
circumstances where consent is, or is not, required, and must ensure that 
consent is obtained when necessary.  The views of children and those with 
parental responsibility should be taken into account if appropriate, and they 
should be kept appropriately informed of progress.  They should also be 
familiar with the National Child Protection Guidance which contains more 
detailed advice on consent and data protection issues.  
 
42.  Consent is not legally required from parents or children before interviewing 
them or before visually recording the interview.  Nor is consent required to 
view a recording of an interview when:- 
•  it is necessary to view a recording of the interview for the purpose of 
investigation of a criminal complaint, or by the children’s reporter for the 
purpose of investigating a child protection concern.  
•  the content of a recording (or more accurately, an interview) materially 
affects the conduct or outcome of an investigation, e.g. when aspects of 
the investigation may have to be re-visited or re-done. 
•  There is a Court Order requiring disclosure.  
 
43.  Consent is legally required to view recordings where for example, the 
reason to view does not form a direct part of the purpose for obtaining (as 
outlined in paragraph 8) the recording, such as: -  
•  Competence Evaluation - a formal process of monitoring the professional 
and technical competence of interviewers to assist professional 
development, support professional qualification, inform performance 
assessment, or facilitate a  registration scheme; 
•  Complaint - a notification from an interested party of dissatisfaction with 
aspects of  the conduct of an investigation or interviews, which may 
require formal investigation in respect of possible disciplinary or 
professional misconduct procedures, or the monitoring of standards. 
 
44.  In Scotland, a person of twelve years or more is presumed to be of sufficient 
age and maturity to give consent.  Where consent is required to view a 
recording, agreement should be sought and obtained from the child where 
appropriate and interviewers should explain the reasons behind this.  They 
may find it helpful to read the information leaflet at Appendix D which sets out 
a variety of potential uses, and use the form provided at Appendix E of this 
guidance to obtain written consent.  
 
The lead and second interviewers (including switching roles) 
45.  The lead interviewer may be from either the police or social work and roles 
will be agreed at the planning stage after due consideration of all relevant 
 
 
16
 

 
factors.  This may include consideration of who the child/young person may 
best relate to.  
 
46.  The second interviewer will have a clear, active role.  When the interview is 
visually recorded, their role will be to monitor the dialogue and demeanour of 
both the child and lead interviewer.  This includes looking for inconsistencies 
or gaps in the child’s account, and any misinterpretations on the interviewer’s 
or child’s part.  The second interviewer may, as required, intervene in the 
interview to clarify or enable the child to add to their account, particularly 
where gaps or inconsistencies have been identified.  Where it is agreed by 
the interviewers during the planning stage, the second interviewer’s queries 
may be raised during or at the end of the interview, as agreed.  When the 
interview is not visually recorded, part of the second interviewer’s role will be 
to record the interview verbatim. 
 
47.  It may be necessary, on occasion, for the agreed roles of the interviewers to 
be transferred in the course of the interview.  This may be because it is clear 
that the child indicates a strong preference to communicate directly with the 
second interviewer rather than the lead interviewer.  This may denote a 
change in the ‘lead’ interviewer role for the remainder of the interview and is 
more than the expected interventions ascribed to the second interviewer (as 
per paragraph 46 above)).  Where it is necessary to change roles 
interviewers should ensure that this is undertaken in as seamless a fashion 
as possible.  It is recommended that interviewers always plan for this 
exigency in their interview planning discussions and agree how this will be 
managed if and when necessary,  This can be done, for example, through 
using a pre-agreed ‘signal’ between the interviewers or by using a brief break 
in the interview  and resuming with changed roles.  It is very important that 
this should not be done if it will disrupt the flow of information which the child 
is able to give or if it is to the detriment of the child and their capacity to 
participate effectively in the interview. 
 
48.  Where the interview is visually recorded, the second interviewer may make 
some written notes to facilitate the conduct of the interview as it proceeds, 
and note any interjections and salient points.  Any such written note may form 
the basis of any urgent child protection action needed, and must always be 
retained and submitted along with the visual recording as a production. 
 
49.  For visual recording, when the supervisors responsible for planning the 
enquiry decide who will conduct the interview, they have the option of 
deciding whether both interviewers will sit in the interview room, or whether 
one should sit in the control room, observing and communicating using the 
technology.  The control room houses the visual recording equipment, 
including a TV screen to allow simultaneous viewing of the interview, and an 
audio link to the interview room.  This facility allows for the possibility for the 
second interviewer to be sited here, in communication with the lead 
interviewer via an earpiece (see paragraph 53).  It is recognised that there 
may be occasions where the recording site does not have a control room as 
such, or the interview is visually recorded using mobile equipment. 
 
 
 
17
 

 
50.  An appropriate system of communication between the interviewers should be 
agreed beforehand, especially if an earpiece is to be used, which will allow 
the lead and second interviewer to address/revisit/expand upon particular 
issues or adapt the prepared interview strategy according to the developing 
needs of the child or the information being given by the child.  Interviewers 
should familiarise themselves with this technique and practice using 
earpieces prior to undertaking a JII.  Contingency plans in case of equipment 
failure should also be confirmed.   
 
51.  Whether the second interviewer is in the interview room or control room, they 
should be monitoring the progress of the interview, noting salient points only, 
which would include any disclosure made.  Making very detailed notes 
defeats the objective of visual recording of focussing on the child.  The 
second interviewer’s role is to devote attention to monitoring the progress of 
the interview, the child’s reactions, and communicating to the lead interviewer 
any issues requiring follow up.   
 
52.  The second interviewer (where present in the room) may also directly 
question the child.  If the second interviewer has an issue that needs to be 
raised, this should be indicated to the lead interviewer during an appropriate 
pause.  This can be done by a physical signal if the second interviewer is in 
the interview room, or using a pre-agreed phrase if the second interviewer is 
communicating via an earpiece from the control room.  The pre-agreed 
phrase could be a single word, with the second interviewer saying nothing 
more until the lead interviewer is able to pause and signal readiness to listen, 
e.g. by using a phrase such as “I’ll just look at my papers”. 
 
53.  The interjections or suggestions made by the second interviewer (where 
communicating by ear-piece from the control room; see paragraph 49) should 
also be noted as part of the recording process.  Where interviews are 
conducted in this way, at all times it should be ensured that the interjections 
of the second interviewer are properly noted (and audio recorded for the 
avoidance of any doubt) and available as part of the complete interview 
record.   
 
The presence of a ‘support person’ at interview 
54.  The number of people present at interview should be kept to an absolute 
minimum, to avoid intimidating or inhibiting the child.  This would normally 
mean the interviewer(s) but the presence of some professionals such as an 
interpreter may be essential.  In certain cases, however, a child may wish for, 
and benefit from, having a supportive adult present.  Where this is deemed 
necessary, the reasons for this (or the reasons for refusal when this has been 
requested) must always be recorded.  
 
55.  The need for the presence of a ‘support person’ should be considered, when 
relevant or appropriate, during the planning of the investigative interview. 
There is no legal requirement to have one present during the interview.  The 
need for a support person will depend entirely on the circumstances of the 
 
 
18
 

 
case.  If a support person is deemed necessary, careful consideration must 
be given as to who can fulfil this role.  Care must be taken when considering 
relatives as they may have their own issues and concerns.  The underlying 
principle is to get the best information from the child, not to create concerns 
or to cause difficulties/divisions within families.  
 
56.  Every effort should be made to establish that any support person identified is 
not a witness or potential witness, nor someone who has a personal interest 
in the case.  Ideally the support person should not be the child’s parent or 
carer.  This is important where, for example: 
 
•  the parent/carer is suspected of being directly involved in the offence  
•  the parent/carer’s relationship with the offender is likely to lead to a conflict of 
interest (see also part 4, paragraphs 180-182  on personnel at interviews with 
children who have additional support needs in the JII setting)  
•  their presence may adversely influence the capacity of the child to participate 
in the interview, or adversely influence the content of any information the child 
might provide. 
 
57.  It must be noted, also, that the presence of a support person might be more 
of a hindrance to the child if that adult is someone the child has a particular 
relationship with (e.g. teacher, parent) and the child feels uncomfortable 
about that adult knowing intimate details about their personal life and/or what 
may have happened to them.  
 
58.  Under no circumstances should the interview be conducted in the presence of 
the person alleged or suspected to be causing the child harm; or who may 
use any information to which they may become party; to further harm the 
child, or others, or prejudice the enquiry or its outcome.   
 
59.  Where the presence of a support person is deemed necessary, interviewers 
should always appropriately and fully explain their role as the support person 
to them before the interview commences.  This includes any advice about 
when the support person might best leave the interview (if he or she is not to 
remain throughout).  The support person should be given any available 
information leaflet which further outlines the purpose of their presence as the 
support person.  They must be made aware that they are not to participate in 
the interview itself, i.e. no answering of questions, or prompting of the child.  
Efforts should be made to ensure that the body language and facial 
expressions of the support person avoid conveying any emotions or 
intentions towards the child.  Their role is to support the child so that the child 
has sufficient composure or confidence to engage in the interview process.  
The presence of the support person during the interview should be comforting 
and reassuring.   
 
60.  If the presence of a support person is necessary, they should preferably sit 
out of the line of the child’s vision but can be prepared to move to 
comfort/reassure the child if the need arises.  However, any form of physical 
contact between the support person and the child should be avoided where 
possible. 
 
 
19
 

 
 
61.  Visual recording within an interview suite opens up the possibility of having 
observers sited outwith the room, so one possibility, if the child is willing, is to 
have the adult sit in an adjacent room.  This can often placate the worries of 
both the child and the adult, while ensuring the interview remains focused.  
The child should be informed that the adult is nearby and on hand should 
they be needed to support the child and should be reminded of this as 
required throughout the interview.  
 
62.  When visually recording, it is important to keep everyone, including any 
support persons and interpreters, within the view of the widescreen camera’s 
view.  The faces of everyone present should also be visible, but this needs to 
be balanced with orientating adults to create a supportive and communicative 
relationship with the child.  A supervisor/manager/interview adviser may 
observe from the control room or give advice in a particularly complex case 
(see part 5 on complicating factors).  
 
63.  In many interviews, the presence of the support person may only be required 
to ‘settle’ the child in such a way that helps the child achieve sufficient 
composure or confidence to engage with the interview.  Normally this would 
be achieved during the introduction and rapport phases of the interview. In 
such circumstances, a judgement needs to be made by interviewers as to 
whether it is necessary or beneficial for the support person to remain in the 
interview for its duration.  If not, then some arrangement should be made to 
enable the support person to absent themselves at an appropriate juncture 
without either distracting or disconcerting the child.  This should be addressed 
with the support person before the interview begins.  Where it is necessary to 
have a support person present the requirement for them to remain throughout 
the interview should be considered on a case by case basis.  Where a 
support person leaves the interview (having successfully reassured and 
settled the child), they should remain nearby in case their re-introduction 
becomes necessary, either in the interview or during any temporary break. 
 
64.  The presence of the support person, and its benefit (or otherwise) for the 
interview, should always be discussed in the debriefing conducted by 
supervisors after the conclusion of the interview. 
 
Interview that does not produce relevant information 
65.  While one of the main purposes of the investigative interview is to gather 
sufficient evidence to establish whether or not a crime may have been 
committed against the child or anyone else, interviewers must never enter 
the interview with the intention of only seeking information that 
substantiates a suspicion/allegation
.  Interviewers must always keep an 
open mind.
  Accordingly, they should aim to obtain all relevant information 
from the witness, irrespective of whether this confirms or refutes the matter 
under investigation.  Confirmation bias must be avoided (see paragraph 40). 
 
 
 
20
 

 
66.  When a child does not give evidentially relevant information during an 
interview, this is an acceptable outcome, not a failure on anyone’s part, 
especially the child’s.  It may be that the child is not yet willing or able to give 
such information, that the conditions in the interview were not conducive to it 
being provided, or that the child did not witness the act under investigation.  
Where no evidentially relevant information is provided, interviewers should 
remember to properly conclude the interview in accordance with the guidance 
(set out in paragraphs 149 and 150 on the closure phase).   
 
67.  It is quite common for children to deny or retract earlier statements at 
subsequent interviews, although no inferences should be drawn from this.  
Judgements should not be made at this stage regarding the child’s ability to 
give evidence.  Even if children appear confident during an investigation, the 
passage of time, second thoughts, possible intimidation and other factors can 
alter a child’s ability to give evidence subsequently.  Research suggests that 
the evidence children give will be the most fresh and accurate on first telling, 
closest to the original disclosure (Plotnikoff & Woolfson, 2001).    
 
68.  Interviewers should prepare and plan for all such eventualities.  Where 
interviews are being conducted following previous retractions, these should 
be approached and prepared for in line with this guidance.  Previous 
retractions should not therefore adversely influence the open-minded 
approach of interviewers nor their interview strategy or practice. 
 
 
 
 
21
 

PART 3:  CONDUCTING THE JOINT INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW 
 

69.  While planning a JII is underway, it is still possible to record information 
offered by children in response to open prompts for information, while 
arrangements are being made for urgent action such as placing the child in a 
place of safety, or making medical examinations.  Indeed, any police officer or 
social worker could do this, acting in the same way as any person who is an 
initial receiver of the child’s information.   
 
70.  All interviewers should be trained in accordance with the revised National 
Curriculum on JIIT and deemed competent through recognised competence 
evaluation/accreditation arrangements.  
 
Implications of visual recording for conducting the interview 
71.  Visual recording provides a far superior record of an interview than ‘verbatim’ 
note taking, and frees the second interviewer to devote more attention to the 
child and interview.  It is for the discretion of procurators fiscal or children’s 
reporters whether or not to use the recordings; however, the recording must 
be disclosed to the defence if the content is to be used in a criminal 
prosecution as evidence of a suspect’s guilt or if the content is classified by 
procurator fiscal/children’s reporter as relevant material for the purpose of 
disclosure (set out in paragraphs 213-215 on points of principle).  In terms of 
disclosure the recording will have to be disclosed to all parties involved.  
Information gleaned during the course of the visually recorded interview may 
be useful in other contexts, e.g. actions to safeguard the child’s welfare 
and/or the welfare of other children.   
 
72.  Using visual recording offers opportunities to improve the quality of 
interviews, and also makes the standard more apparent.  This has several 
implications, and generally means that it is clearer whether or not best 
practice has been followed.   
 
73.  The recording includes all of the statements, pauses, body language and 
demeanour of the interviewer(s), as well as those of the child and any 
supporters present.  As well as the information provided by the child that may 
be of evidential value, this also gives a clear impression to the viewer of how 
evidence was obtained.   
 
74.  It is acknowledged that safeguarding the child supersedes forensic 
requirements (see paragraphs 3 and 38).  If the interview develops in a way 
that is likely to make use of the interview as evidence difficult because, for 
example, the child alludes to an alleged offence that may not be pursued, the 
interview should continue.  The fact that an interview is being visually 
recorded must not alter good practice on such issues in order to attempt to 
meet forensic requirements.   
 
75.  Further proceedings should not be seen as the ‘aim’ of visually recording an 
interview, just as when carrying out a non-visually recorded JII.  The main 
22 

 
reason for recording is to provide an accurate and full record of the interview, 
and there are a range of appropriate courses of subsequent action.  However 
the fact that a recording may be viewed in a court with the rules of evidence 
that this entails should always be borne in mind by interviewers, and form a 
key part of their specialist training.  This will include the need to note reasons 
for decisions made throughout the interview process.   
 
Immediately pre-interview 
 
Transportation to interview 
 

76.  As far as possible any conversation about the case should be avoided during 
the journey to the interview.  If however the child raises issues material to the 
case or its circumstances, the conversation should be directed back to neutral 
topics.  A comprehensive written record of any conversation that took place 
during transportation should be made at the earliest possible time after the 
journey as this is a potential area for cross-examination in court. 
 
Technical checks 
 
77.  At the planning stage, contingency plans for technical difficulties should be 
agreed.  If the problem is anything other than minor, that is to say where there 
is no immediate obvious cause which can be easily remedied, it may be 
better to postpone the interview and reschedule it, rather than keep re-
starting or leaving the child waiting.   
 
Information to record at the start 
 
78.  The time and date, the personnel involved, the location of the interview, the 
name and age of the child, the reason for the interview and the identities of 
anyone else present need to be recorded.  These should be stated by the 
interviewer before the child enters the room. 
The phases of the interview 
79.  All investigative interviews with a child should include the following broad 
phases 
• Introductions 
•  Rapport   
•  Practice Interview (when appropriate – see paragraph 108) 
• Free 
Narrative 
• Questioning 
• Closure 
 
 
80.  When visually recording, if any of these phases are missed, or the pace is too 
fast, then it is obvious to anyone watching the recording.  For this reason, if a 
phase has already taken place, for example rapport building on the journey to 
the interview suite, the interviewer should mention this for the benefit of those 
viewing or listening to the recording. 
23 

 
 
81.  The interview framework described here is similar to other interview formats 
described in the literature about interviewing children (e.g. the National 
Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) structured 
investigative interview protocol).  The general principle behind this approach 
is to elicit as accurate and comprehensive an account as possible of event(s) 
from a child, an account that may withstand scrutiny of the court as legally 
sound testimony.  Although there are six distinct phases to the interview, 
there may be some overlap between these and interviewers should be 
prepared to switch back and forth between them as appropriate. 
 
82.  To apply effectively the techniques described in this guidance in an actual 
interview setting requires a considerable amount of skill and practice from 
interviewers.  Therefore, JII training (as per the National Curriculum) must 
have been undertaken before live interviews are conducted, and this should 
be up-to-date involving proper practice and feedback from other practitioners 
and trained supervisors, with the visual recordings as a valuable tool in this.  
JI interviewers should not attempt to use other interviewing techniques in 
investigative interviews with child witnesses, unless they have received 
specific training, and that it can be clearly demonstrated that another 
interviewing technique is more appropriate for a particular child than the 
approach set out in this guidance.     
 
Introductions and explaining purpose 
83.  When in the interview room, the lead interviewer should sit with an 
unobstructed view of the child.  If the second interviewer is also in the 
interview room, then since the child’s focus is likely to be directed towards the 
lead for the substantive part of the interview, the second interviewer should 
be seated somewhere convenient for observing and making notes of key 
points.  The second interviewer should be listening to the child and actively 
intervening as necessary but not in a fashion that might come across as 
confrontational or detrimental to the flow of the interview.  As a general rule 
the second interviewer should keep any interjections to a minimum during the 
interview and ideally should wait until invited to participate by the lead 
interviewer.  The preferred method should be agreed by the interviewers 
during the planning phase (see paragraph 50).  
 
84.  Interviewers should introduce any persons present in the interview room to 
the child and explain, in age-appropriate language, why each person is in the 
room.  Any preconceptions or misperceptions about the police and social 
workers (e.g. police only come to see people when they are in trouble, or 
social workers will take children away from their parents) can be addressed at 
this time.  The child’s preferred name or mode of address should be 
established.  The purpose of the interview should be explained clearly and 
simply to the child, who should also be given an opportunity to ask questions.  
However, generally it is not advisable to spend inordinate time clarifying 
factual biographical details with the child.  Such information should already be 
available prior to the interview taking place. 
24 

 
 
EXAMPLE 
 
“Hello (child’s name). My name is _____. I am a police officer/social worker/etc. 
Part of my job is to listen to children and young people.  Sometimes they have 
things that they want to tell me" 
 
 
85.  Children respond to interviews more successfully when they have a better 
understanding of the interview purpose.  To avoid bias, interviewers should 
be careful not to introduce the allegation being investigated.  Even where the 
initial concern originated from something the child had said, it is important for 
the interviewers to hear the child speak freely on this during the course of the 
interview with minimal prompting.  The aim is to obtain the child’s memories 
of the event(s), in their own words
 
86.  Another point to explain to the child is that the interview will be visually 
recorded.   
 
EXAMPLE 
 
“We are going to record this interview, because what you say is very important to 
us and we don’t want to miss anything you tell us.  Do you have any questions?”   
 
87.  The child’s understanding of the recording arrangements should be checked 
and the child offered the chance to ask questions.  This should be done 
regularly throughout the explanation of the interview recording arrangements. 
Most often the child will be shown the visual recording equipment, the 
control/monitoring room and how the technology operates (in simple, child-
friendly and age-appropriate terms).  The intention is to achieve some 
confidence that the child understands the basic implications of visual 
recording and how it will work in the course of the interview and not to 
introduce further areas of concern to the child.  However, it is important to 
check out (by asking the child) that the child is comfortable with the recording 
arrangements and if they have any other questions about how this works or 
will be used after the interview is concluded.  The focus however should 
remain on enabling the child to participate effectively so the child should not 
be burdened with information about the recording arrangements to the 
detriment of their capacity to participate in the interview. If the child indicates 
that visual recording worries them, the interviewer should ask what worries 
them about recording.  Whether or not to continue with visual recording 
should be based on the child’s responses and the success or otherwise of the 
interviewers’ efforts to answer questions and reassure the child in respect of 
their worries or concerns. 
 
Interview atmosphere 
88.  It is important that interview process is not discussed with the child on the 
journey to and from the interview centre as all pre-interview contact needs to 
25 

 
remain scrupulous and can be subject to critical and or difficult examination 
later.  On arrival, there should be a child friendly waiting area available to 
accommodate them until the JII interviewers are ready to commence.  It is 
also important that if more than one child is being interviewed they should not 
have time together between interviews.  
 
89.  The child should be enabled to feel as relaxed and comfortable as possible 
before beginning the interview.  Interviewers should try not to over-emphasise 
their authority in relation to the child as this might cause the child to clam up 
or to simply agree with whatever the interviewer says.  Police interviewers 
should wear plain clothes rather than uniform.  Research suggests that more 
information can be obtained from a child when the interviewer is not in 
uniform (Powell, Wilson & Croft, 2001).  
 
90.  One possible approach for a very young child is to be sitting down on the floor 
at eye-level, to shift the balance of control in favour of the child.  If this 
approach is taken, the need to retain the child and interviewer within view of 
the camera should be addressed during planning, and use of the camera 
controls by the second interviewer if they are in the control room.   
 
91.  The pace of the interview should be dictated primarily by the child.  
Their developmental age, attention span, the time it takes for them to 
overcome any initial misgivings they might have, and so on will all affect the 
length and pace of the interview.  The number and complexity of alleged 
incidents will also impact on the overall duration of the interview.  
 
92.  Interviewers should speak slowly and clearly and allow for pauses.  They 
should refrain from interrupting the child or immediately ‘jumping in’ when the 
child appears reluctant/unable to talk.  In fact, pausing and not interrupting 
the child is the best technique for allowing the child to search their memory 
effectively. Interviewers should also speak in a normal voice tone - an 
affected tone might be construed as trying to impress the child or influence 
their responses, may convey a sense of worry, or be perceived as 
patronising. 
 
93.  It is acceptable for the interviewer(s) to ask the child to speak up if the child 
cannot be heard, although the microphones are sensitive.  If the second 
interviewer is monitoring from the control room, this is something they can 
notify to the lead interviewer.  Children are, generally speaking, used to 
technology and a stilted interview atmosphere is likely to have much more 
effect on the child than the presence of cameras (Richards et al, 2007).  
There is no need to ask the child to speak up ‘for the camera’, since this will 
repeatedly draw attention to it.   
 
94.  Interviewers must be vigilant for signs of fatigue in the child, or the need for a 
refreshment or toilet break.  If the child does wish to take a break, this should 
never be withheld or offered as a reward in an effort to extract or confirm 
information.  Interviewers should not attempt to drive proceedings along or 
continue questioning a child who has become very distressed or restless.  At 
26 

 
the same time, interviewers should not be hasty in providing breaks when the 
topic turns to something difficult or embarrassing.   
 
95.  If the child leaves the room for a refreshment or toilet break the lead 
interviewer must state for the recording what is happening.  The note of 
salient points made by the second interviewer should include times and 
reasons for breaks, how long they lasted, what the child was doing during the 
break, who they spoke to, what was said, and so on.   
 
96.  Taking into account all the factors above emphasises the need for flexibility to 
meet the individual circumstances as presented in each case. 
 
Interview principles  
97.  While the interviewer must make clear to the child the underlying principles of 
the interview, there is substantial information in research and literature to 
indicate that “ground rules” are most effective when dispersed across the 
interview at salient/relevant junctures, rather than listed as a ‘litany’ at the 
outset.  There are strong suggestions that the litany approach is, in fact, 
counter-productive and unnecessary (see Berliner and Conte, 1995; Saywitz 
and Faller, 2006).  This information should be regarded as “things a child 
might need to know about the interview” rather than as ‘ground-rules’ and be 
proffered in this manner.   
 
98.  It is recommended that interviewers do not just ask whether the child 
understands the information but check by giving examples. Interviewers 
should also use language appropriate to the age/ability of the child.   
 
99.  Appropriate principles which should be communicated to the child are: 
 
•  The interviewer is there mainly to listen.  This is the child’s chance to do most 
of the talking. 
•  The interviewer needs the child’s help to understand what (if anything) has 
happened. 
•  Even if the child thinks the interviewer already knows something, they should 
still tell them anyway. 
•  If the interviewer asks a question that the child does not know or remember 
the answer to, it’s OK for the child to say “I don’t know/remember”. 
•  If the interviewer asks a question that the child finds too difficult or unclear, 
the child should let the interviewer know so they can say it in a different way. 
•  The child should not try to guess the answers.  They should only talk about 
true things, things that really happened.   
•  If the interviewer makes a mistake, or says something that is not true, it is 
okay for the child to correct the interviewer. 
•   Sometimes the interviewer will ask the child the same question again.  This 
does not mean that the child gave the wrong answer the first time, it is just to 
help the interviewer remember what has been said.  The child should always 
tell the truth.    
27 

 
 
Telling the truth 
100.  Section 24 of the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 abolished the 
competence test in respect of all witnesses, removing the court’s requirement 
to ask questions of child or vulnerable adult witnesses designed to establish 
that they had a sufficient understanding of the truth, understood the duty to 
tell the truth and had the ability to give coherent testimony.  However, 
Chapter 11 of the Vulnerable Witnesses Guidance Pack (Scottish Executive, 
2006), on Stand Alone Provisions acknowledges the role of investigative 
interviewers in clarifying the child’s level of understanding: 
 
“While the Act prohibits the use of the competence test in criminal and 
civil court proceedings, this may raise the question for practitioners about 
its application to other stages of proceedings, in particular the 
investigative interview.  It is no longer expected that a child or vulnerable 
adult (for example an adult with learning disability) needs to demonstrate 
their understanding of the need to tell the truth or the difference between 
telling the truth and telling a lie.  However, the court will still have to make 
a judgement of the witness’s truthfulness and reliability, therefore any 
interview should still clarify, in age appropriate ways, the witness’s level 
of understanding.  This exploration will assist the court in determining 
issues of credibility and reliability.”  
(Scottish Executive, 2006: Chapter 
11, p3) 
 
101.  The child does not have to take the oath for an investigative interview but it is 
advisable to make them aware at the outset of the importance of giving their 
own, true account.  By ‘true account’, that is saying what actually happened.  
Interviewers should not ask for definitions of what is a truth or a lie as this is a 
difficult task.  Instead, the interviewer should emphasise that they want to 
know what the child actually saw.  It is important that throughout the 
interview, interviewers note their assessment of the abilities of the child in 
how they perceive and communicate any distinctions between events that 
have actually happened and those that are pretended. 
 
EXAMPLE 
“I want you to tell me what really happened, even if you said something different to 
somebody else at some other time” 
• 
Tell me what you saw 
• 
Tell me what you heard 
• 
Tell me what happened  
 
102.  Where there is sufficient doubt over the level of understanding of a witness 
the interviewers should take steps to ensure that questions are put to the 
child in a way that they can understand. 
 
28 

 
Rapport; establishing a ‘child-centred’ interview 
103.  The rapport phase is an excellent opportunity for the interviewer to gain a 
better understanding of the child’s communication skills and current stage of 
cognitive, social and emotional development.   
 
104.  From the rapport building, the interviewer can also learn more about the 
child’s use and understanding of vocabulary and adjust their own accordingly.  
The interviewer should also encourage the child to give an open-ended 
account (and detailed description).  They should avoid questions that will 
prompt brief one-word answers as much as possible, to set the form of the 
substantive phase of the interview.  
 
105.  Even in cases where the child is already familiar with the interviewer(s) 
through previous contact, time should be taken for fresh rapport building 
before commencing the interview.  How long is spent on this phase is up to 
the discretion and experience of the interviewers.  
 
106.  The rapport phase should, of course, be recorded along with the rest of the 
interview.  This can easily be done if the interview is visually recorded.  Until 
this is widely introduced, practitioners should record the broad areas 
discussed in rapport building.  But they should take a verbatim record if the 
child alludes to anything (which may be) of material or evidential relevance to 
the matter of concern during any “neutral” discussions).   
 
Undertaking a practice interview 
107.  Many JII interviewers find it helpful to use a ‘practice interview’ as a precursor 
to the investigative interview itself.  A practice interview is recommended as 
good practice (Sternberg et al (1997), Brubacher, Roberts & Powell (2011) as 
it has a number of distinct advantages, the most important of which are:- 
 
•  To allow the interviewer to help the child to become accustomed to the 
interviewing situation and techniques.  This involves the interviewer 
regularly using ‘invitations’ or ‘prompts’ such as “tell me about…” or “tell 
me more about that”.  These ‘prompts’ ought to feature regularly 
throughout the interview itself since they are the most effective way of 
eliciting detail and free narratives from children.  The use of such ‘prompts’ 
throughout the interview should be a central practice technique in effective 
interviewing of children. 
•  To enable the interviewer to “rehearse” the consistent use of ‘prompts’. 
This allows the interviewer to become more familiar in their use and more 
comfortable in this interviewing technique before entering into the interview 
itself (in respect of the topic(s) of concern). 
•  To allow the interviewer to gather ancillary information about the child’s 
communication abilities/recall/non-verbal communication and to promote a 
level of reassurance and composure. 
 
29 

 
108.  It should be noted that a practice interview may not always be appropriate 
e.g. where it is clear that the child wants to talk about the topic of concern 
right away.  This will always be a matter for professional judgment.  However, 
in reaching a decision interviewers must ensure that they always act in the 
best interests of the child. 
 
 
A PRACTICE INTERVIEW 
 
 
 
A practice interview should normally follow on from Rapport Building with a 
 
child.  The practice interview should include the following:- 
 
•  Ask child to identify a favourite topic or event, e.g. television   
programme (this should be a ‘neutral’ event or topic not directly related 
 
to the suspected topic of concern); 
 
•  Use open-ended questions to get details: Who, What, Where, When, 
 
How 
 
•  Use open-ended prompts to encourage the child to keep talking: e.g., 
 
“Tell me more about” 
 
 
 

 
Raising topic of concern 
109.  Once the practice interview is complete, the interviewer should then make 
efforts to raise the ‘topic of concern’ with the child, remembering to use open-
ended prompts (as used in the practice interview), as a key technique 
throughout the rest of the interview.  This should be done in a way that 
encourages the child spontaneously to come up with information, and is free 
from suggestive influence.  In the rapport phase, the ‘entry’ into the topic of 
concern is often created or touched upon.  This can be used as a direct 
device into establishing the topic of concern. So, for example, a good opener 
would be; 
 
EXAMPLE 
“Now, it’s time to talk about something else, Do you know why you are here 
today?...tell me about that?” 
 
 
110. A bad opener would be, 
 
“I hear you’ve been having problems with Uncle Johnny, is that right?” 
 
111.  Not all children will be able or willing to respond with relevant information to 
general prompts (especially when the initial allegation has come from a 
source other than the child, or where the child has additional support needs), 
so interviewers may have to progress to more specific ones.   
 
30 

 
Free narrative 
112.  The free narrative phase is the most reliable source of accurate and untainted 
information provided the child has not been subject to interviewer bias in 
earlier interviews, and has not been coached.  A free narrative is the child’s 
own uninterrupted account of what has taken place.  Professionals will know 
from the literature and from experience that, due to their developmental 
stage, younger children may be less likely to provide spontaneously 
information than older children and adults.  Interviewers should always 
provide children, of all ages, with sufficient opportunity to describe their 
version of events, in their own words.  
 
113.  There are several ways of obtaining this free narrative.  For example, when 
the child mentions the topic of concern, the interviewer can simply ask, “Tell 
me about that”.  
 
114.  Interviewers should resist ‘jumping in’ to clarify any comments or follow up 
evidentially relevant statements with focused questions during this phase of 
the interview.  Instead, interviewers should adopt the position of an active 
listener – that is, let the child know that the interviewer hears what the child is 
saying and is taking it seriously. 
 
115.  If the child begins to falter, the interviewer should be patient and allow for 
pauses.  If it is clear that the child has finished, the interviewer can use a 
number of strategies, including facilitative prompts.  
 
FACILITATIVE PROMPTS 
 
•  A neutral acknowledgement  (“uh huh”)  
•  Repeat back the child’s last comment (Child: “And then we went into the bedroom 
…” (Pause) Interviewer: “I see, so you went into the bedroom …”) 
•  “Tell me more”  
• “Then 
what?” 
 
 
116.  If the child is pained to speak about the topic then reassure them (“It’s alright. 
Take your time, I’m listening” or “Is there something that would make you 
more comfortable today?”).  Interviewers can be sympathetic but not too 
personal – avoid using terms of endearment (e.g. “dear”, “sweetheart”) and 
initiating physical contact (e.g. leaning over and hugging a child). 
 
117.  All personnel present at the interview should ensure that verbal reinforcement 
is given sporadically and is not contingent on a given response.  Never offer 
the child anything that could be regarded as a form of bribe or inducement 
(e.g. “If you just tell me what he did you can go home”).  Do not indicate 
satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the information the child is giving.  The 
interviewer should maintain neutrality in facial expression and body language, 
as well as verbally.  The child should not be given the impression that the 
31 

 
interviewer is keen to receive information of any particular nature or that a 
particular statement is welcome or unwelcome.  Care should be taken to 
ensure that the interviewer does not introduce something that the child has 
not said or lead the child to associate the response of the interviewer with the 
making of disclosure.  
 
118.  If the child has not given any information regarding the incident being 
investigated, either spontaneously or after prompting (using the 
recommended prompts and facilitators), interviewers should jointly consider 
whether to continue the interview further.  Decisions made at the planning 
phase should be referred back to.  The child may not be ready to speak yet, 
but it may also be the case that the incident did not take place or that the 
child did not witness everything anticipated.  If, in the light of information 
obtained (or not) during the interview and the strength of the original referral, 
the interviewers decide it is in the best interests of the child and justice to 
terminate the interview here, they should then proceed to the Closure Phase. 
 
Prompts 
 
119.  Even when the child has provided a fairly substantial account of the event(s) 
from free narrative, it is likely to be necessary to expand what has been said 
so far with further detail, or to clarify ambiguities.  These prompts should 
ideally be built around what the child has said in the free narrative.   
 
Open-ended prompts 
 
120. Open-ended prompts are phrased in such a way that they invite a more 
detailed response and do not lead or pressurise the child into giving a 
particular answer.  Research shows this form of question can yield up to 3−4 
times longer responses from children. 
 
EXAMPLE 
“You said earlier that you and this man played a game. Please tell me everything you 
can remember about that”. 
 
121.  Not only do open-ended prompts result in more detailed responses, the 
evidence obtained in this way is least likely to be challenged in court.  The 
other advantage of open-ended prompts is that they serve to give children 
control over what they want to divulge. 
32 

 
 
BENEFITS OF OPEN-ENDED PROMPTS 
 
•  Responses to open-ended prompts are more accurate than responses to specific 
questions.  This is assuming the child has not previously been subjected to 
multiple interviews involving persistent and erroneous suggestions. 
•  Open-ended prompts avoid putting the child in a position where they may try to 
answer a specific question even when they do not have the details requested.  
•  Open-ended prompts also avoid the possibility of a yes/no answer.  A child who 
does not understand a question can often try to provide a response even when 
they are unsure of what is being asked – repeating phrases used by an 
interviewer, giving a stereotypical answer, providing a yes answer because that is 
what they think the interviewer wants. 
•  Specific questions do not allow the child to collect their thoughts; it takes time to 
search memory. 
.   
Questioning 
Style of questions  
 
122.  There may be times during the interview when a question is more appropriate 
than an open-ended prompt (see paragraph 119-121).  Questions can be 
posed in several ways and consideration should be given to both the style 
and content of questions.  Interviewers should always aim to phrase 
questions in a way that will produce the most detailed response, and is least 
likely to influence the child’s answer in a particular direction. 
 
123.  The three main types of question are: 
 
• Specific 
• Closed 
• Leading 
 
124.  This can be seen as a hierarchy of interview questions, from most preferable 
down to least preferable, and interviewers should always strive to return to 
free narrative (or open-ended prompts) as much as possible throughout the 
interview. 
 
Specific Questions 
 
125.  Specific questions probe for clarification or a fuller and more detailed account 
of the event(s) the child has previously mentioned.   
 
EXAMPLE 
Where were you when you played this game?” 
 
126.  If a child’s initial response to a specific question is deemed incomplete, 
interviewers can pose the question again but in a different form.  Persistently 
33 

 
repeating a question is not advisable as the child may come to believe their 
first answer was wrong, and consequently alter their response to something 
they think the interviewer wants to hear.  Where a child has provided 
information as a response to a Specific Question it is advisable to follow this 
up with an open-ended prompt (“You said this happened in the bedroom ... 
tell me as much as you can about the bedroom ...”).   
 
127.  It may become clear that there were multiple incidents of alleged abuse or 
matters of concern (these episodes are most likely to stand out in the child’s 
mind as distinct events).  It might be helpful once the incident is described, to 
give it a unique label that the child understands and associates with.  This 
can be used as a reference point for accessing memories of other 
(subsequent/prior) incidents.  Interviewers should note that this technique 
might not be so beneficial with children who have a learning disability and 
whose understanding of temporal terms such as ‘the first time’, ‘the last time’ 
is often limited.  
 
EXAMPLES 
Did that happen one time or more than one time? 
 
Tell me everything about the last time[first time/time in [location]/the time you[some 
specified activity] 
something happened. 
 
Closed Questions 
 
128.  Closed questions provide the child with only a limited number of response 
options, usually “yes”, “no” or “don’t know”.  When used inappropriately, such 
questions tend to yield less accurate information.  This is particularly so when 
there are sequences of closed questions asked in succession since this might 
be construed by the child (and others) as interrogative. 
 
EXAMPLE 
“Was anyone else in the house when this happened?” 
 
129.  Children are less likely to say “I don’t know” to a closed question and more 
likely to guess or be misled by the interviewer.  Thus, interviewers must take 
care if using closed questions and should always remember to follow 
immediately with open-ended prompts for a spontaneous provision of 
information. 
 
Leading Questions 
 
130.  A leading question is one which is presented in such a way that it suggests a 
certain answer to the child or one which makes assumptions about facts yet 
to be confirmed. 
 
EXAMPLE 
So then he touched you, didn’t he?” 
 
34 

 
131.  Whether a question is construed as leading or not depends on a number of 
factors: e.g. the nature of the question; whether the child has already 
mentioned, for the above example, any physical contact or not; the tone of 
the interviewer’s voice when asking the question; and so on.  Generally, 
leading questions on a particular point should only be asked at a point where 
interviewers have approached the matter by asking open-ended prompts, 
specific or closed questions but require to probe the issue further.  By 
exhausting other means of approaching the issue first, it should be possible 
to view and assess the answers to the leading questions.  It is important to 
ensure that any questioning which is ultimately assessed to have affected the 
child’s evidence on the point is minimal, isolated and comes at a point when it 
does not risk affecting the whole of the child’s evidence and any questions 
which might follow the leading question. (see also paragraph 143 about 
evidence gaps which may need to be probed) 
 
132.  It may be more useful to draw a distinction, and create two categories: 
‘leading’ and ‘misleading’ questions.  The former can lead a child to give a 
correct response whereas the latter leads a child to give an incorrect 
response.  To return to the above example, if the child had actually been 
touched then an affirmative response would be a true response.  However, if 
no physical contact had taken place yet the child gave an affirmative 
response, the nature of questioning could be directed away from true events.  
Note the previous reference to confirmation bias (paragraph 40).  The danger 
of such questioning is that interviewers rarely know the answer, therefore 
cannot be sure whether they have asked a leading or misleading question.  
 
133.  A misleading question can also be based on an incorrect 
interpretation/reiteration of what the child has said.  An example would be 
where a child mentions getting into a blue car with a stranger and the 
interviewer then asks, “Tell me more about this green car”, to which the child 
responds with a fuller description.  Such questioning might jeopardise the 
credibility of the child’s statement.  It is vital therefore that interviewers listen 
carefully to the child witness and that the second interviewer actively monitors 
the child’s responses. 
 
134.  A leading question that is based on something a child said during a free 
narrative stage may be acceptable.  A response to a leading question based 
on an interviewer’s hunch is not to be trusted.  Leading questions, if ever 
used during an interview, should be immediately followed with an open-ended 
prompt to get a free response.  Out of the three main question types, leading 
questions are most likely to lead to answers that will be considered unreliable 
in court.  Consequently, extreme care should be taken when using this type of 
question, especially where they relate to identification or a description of the 
act and are material to the case.  
 
135.  Interviewers should bear in mind the significant risk that answers to leading 
questions may be rejected in evidence.  Added to that, the asking of a leading 
question may result in a later statement by the child being rejected as 
unreliable on the ground that the child has been influenced by the question 
35 

 
itself.  The result of leading questions may be that the child’s later statements 
may be viewed as “contaminated” by the content of such questions. 
 
Content of questions 
 
136.  Interviewers should aim to keep questions as unambiguous, simple and as 
short as possible.   
 
TYPES OF QUESTIONS TO AVOID 
 
•  Double negatives: “Don’t you remember whether you said no or not?” 
•  Multiple propositions: “Did you think that you would get into trouble if you 
didn’t go along with it, or did you think that it was a cool thing to do, because 
you were told that all the other boys had done it?” 
•  Very long questions 
•  Questions containing legal jargon 
•  Abstract or hypothetical questions: “Do you think this would still have 
happened if…?” 
 
SOME (DEVELOPMENTALLY) TROUBLESOME CONCEPTS FOR CHILDREN, 
WITH POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS 
 
•  “Behind”, “in front of”, “beneath”, “above”:  Might need to ask child to 
demonstrate what they mean 
•  Dates and times:  Can use memorable or routine events as reference markers 
such as birthday, school or television schedules (thus can pin-point the event 
to a particular month, week, day, or even time of day)  
•  Estimates of length, height and weight:  Can be specified relative to another 
object or person familiar to the child 
•  Estimates of age:  Again, can be specified relative to another person the child 
knows 
•  Frequency of events: Young children may have trouble estimating frequency; 
specific examples may help 
•  Use of “he”, “she” and “they”: Better to say their specific name(s) 
•  “Anything”: Better to say “all” or “everything”  
•  When there is a change of topic: To reduce confusion or misunderstandings, 
signal change with a phrase such as “I’d now like to go on to talk about 
something else… 
•  Passive voice: Better to use the active voice, e.g. “Person X hit Person Y” 
rather than “Person Y was hit by Person X”  
 
137.  If the interviewer feels that they have used a question that may be deemed 
inappropriate then the reasons for using the question should be noted.  
Where an inappropriate question is used in error, then the steps taken to 
mitigate the error should also be noted.    
36 

 
 
Seeking clarifications 
 
138.  Some of the child’s own use of vocabulary may cause problems for the 
interviewer.  Young children often over- and under- extend the meaning of 
words.  That is, they may use the term “private parts” to encompass body 
parts other than the genitals which are also usually covered under clothing 
(e.g. knees), or deny being touched but later admit to having been kissed as 
they consider touching to involve the hands.  
 
139.  Imprecise anatomical terms (e.g. “front bottom”) will need to be explained – 
for crimes such as rape, the interviewer will need to know exactly what parts 
of anatomy were involved.  Moreover, if a child uses certain sexual terms 
during their statement, the interviewer cannot assume that the child fully 
understands them.  The child might simply have overheard adults using them 
or come across them in magazines, without ever finding out their true 
meaning.  Where there is ambiguity, the interviewer should ask gently for 
clarification.  
 
140.  Children should never be asked to use their own or the interviewer’s body to 
demonstrate an action or body part to clarify something they said.  However, 
children may spontaneously point to their body.  The interviewer should also 
identify the child’s preferred name for the body part and repeat it back to them 
for clarification purposes.  It is also beneficial to ask the child for the proper or 
other names of the relevant body part.  The use of anatomically-correct dolls 
or pre-formatted diagrams should be used with caution and preferably after 
suitable training (see paragraphs 145-148).    
 
141.  Clarification is also important when a child’s statement contains fantastical or 
bizarre elements, e.g. the mention of “glue” during a sexual act.  Interviewers 
should ask, "Where did the glue come from?"  Seemingly bizarre elements 
may turn out to be quite rational, e.g. “glue” meaning semen. 
 
142.  It should be highlighted that children sometimes reveal new and different 
information across statements and interviewers.  It is important to bear in 
mind that differences are not necessarily inaccuracies. 
  It is also 
possible that a child makes genuine mistakes, or cannot recall case-relevant 
information, because of memory loss or recall failure.  However, on occasion, 
children may also be motivated to fabricate or exaggerate their accounts.  In 
addition, what a child has said may be inconsistent with or omit other 
information already gathered in the course of an investigation for example, 
from other witnesses.   
 
143. If there are significant and unexplained evidential inconsistencies, these 
should be probed during the interview.  Dealing with inconsistencies at the 
time is more effective and does not need to imply that the child was 
deliberately misleading.  It could be a result of poor or confused interview 
technique or, indeed, a signifier of more serious circumstances that the child 
is struggling to reveal.  Interviewers must take care not to assume or imply 
that the child is lying.  Assessing the appropriate questioning approach 
37 

 
requires a delicate balance to be struck.  If necessary, interviewers should be 
prepared to break the interview to discuss the appropriate approach.  Such 
issues should be identified at the earliest possible stage and ideally at the 
planning stage.  Interviewers should agree a strategy for approaching issues 
which are likely to result in inconsistencies arising in the course of interviews. 
Any inconsistencies should be probed after the child has finished their free 
narrative or at the end of the interview as appropriate.   
 
144.  Similarly, if gaps in evidence are to be probed (e.g. significant information 
already known from the investigation has been omitted from the child’s 
account) then this should only be done with consideration, and after the child 
has finished their free narrative.  All such probing questions, particularly when 
concerning evidential inconsistencies, should be asked in a tactful and non-
confrontational manner, bearing in mind that the child may be susceptible to 
suggestion or acquiescence.  If leading questions are required then this may 
be of limited evidential value unless a more detailed response can be elicited 
through a follow-on open-ended prompt.   
Props 
145.  Research raises concerns about the reliability of evidence gathered with the 
use of anatomically-correct dolls or pre-formatted diagrams during 
investigative interviews with children, especially very young children.  
Research (e.g. Bruck et al., 1995; Stewart & Stewart, 1996) shows dolls and 
toys used in this way may increase inaccuracies especially in younger 
children.  The use of anatomically-correct dolls or pre-formatted diagrams 
should be used with caution and preferably after suitable training (see 
paragraph 140).  In the main, anatomically accurate dolls should only be used 
as an adjunct to the interview to allow the child to demonstrate the meaning 
of terms used by them or to clarify verbal statements.   
 
146.  Props should never be used in conjunction with leading questions nor should 
their use be instigated by the interviewer.  Interviewers should always be 
clear and explicit about why particular props or drawing were introduced or 
used and the reasons for doing so at particular junctures in the interview.  
This should always be explicitly considered in the planning of an interview 
and, where such props or drawing have been used or made, the reasons 
recorded by the interviewers in their records following the interview. 
 
147.  It is acceptable for children to hold on to items that they themselves have 
brought along to the interview as comforters, e.g. ‘safety’ blanket.  This also 
includes dolls or stuffed animals but interviewers should not use these as 
props nor try to interpret the child’s behaviour with the toy in the context of 
their evidence.   
 
148.  Along with all props, any drawings made during, or brought along to, the 
interview should be recorded in the interviewer’s notes and shown to the 
camera at the end.  Particular reference should be made to when and how 
the prop/drawing was introduced and how it was used.  At the end of the 
38 

 
interview, any drawings should be signed and dated on the reverse side by 
both interviewers and retained by the police as productions.  
Closure  
149.  It is essential to end every interview properly with a closure phase, even if an 
interview has had to be terminated prematurely or no disclosure has been 
made.  The following features should be included: 
 
CLOSURE 
 
•  The lead interviewer should summarise (using the child’s language as much 
as possible) the important evidential points in the child’s statement, confirming 
that those aspects have been understood correctly. 
•  The lead interviewer should check with the second interviewer whether any 
additional questions or clarifications are required. 
•  The child should be asked if they have any questions they want answered, or 
something else which they wish to add. 
•  The child should be informed of what, if anything, will happen next.  
Explanations should be honest and realistic but appropriate for the child’s age 
and level of understanding.  Commonly asked questions include “Will [the 
alleged offender] go to prison?”  Interviewers should be prepared to answer 
such questions but should avoid making promises that cannot be kept. 
•  The child and/or their guardian should be provided with a contact name and 
number plus advice on where they can seek help.  This should include a 
contact from the police or social work but some children and/or their families 
may also need further support from voluntary agencies or professional 
counsellors or therapists (see paragraph 13 on guidance for therapeutic 
support).    
•  Interviewers should thank the child for their time and effort – but take care not 
to thank the child for the information given – and show that they have taken 
the child’s account seriously. 
•  Interviewers should inform the child of the possibility of further interviews. 
•  Finally, children should be given time to compose themselves.  The main aim 
of closure is that the child leaves the interview in a positive frame of mind, not 
distressed.  Neutral topics, such as those covered in the rapport phase, can 
be discussed in order to help achieve this state 
 
150.  No child should ever be made to feel that they have failed or disappointed the 
interviewers if they do not impart any details of apparent evidential value 
during the interview. 
Action immediately afterwards: Creating the recording log 
151.  At this stage consent forms can be signed by the parent or carer if the child is 
aged under 12 (and the child’s views obtained) or by the child if aged 12 or 
over.   
 
39 

 
152.  A note of salient points or ‘guide’ to the full recording should be agreed by the 
two interviewers immediately afterwards.  Any drawings made should also be 
preserved.   
 
153.  The recording should be assigned a unique number from a ‘recording log’, to 
be kept by a responsible officer and used to track the location of recordings at 
all times, and to safeguard them. 
 
154.  Further guidance about handling and storing recordings is at paragraphs 205-
212, Appendix F and Appendix G.  
 
Debriefing and further interviews 
155.  Once the interview has been completed, a debriefing session should be 
arranged between the interviewers and the nominated senior social worker 
and/or police supervisor overseeing the investigation.  The debriefing session 
is an important part of the process of joint planning and management of child 
protection enquiries.  The findings from the interview and any further action 
can be discussed and decided upon.  This may include the need for another 
interview and/or arrangements for a medical examination.  The debriefing 
session can also provide an opportunity to identify operational and practice 
issues that require to be addressed externally to the enquiry (e.g. training 
needs, procedural gaps, Trauma Risk Management).  A record of the 
debriefing session and all decisions made should be taken, and copies kept 
by both agencies.  Appendix B provides an overview on the role of 
supervisors and managers in briefing and debriefing practitioners. 
 
156.  The complete visual recording provides an ideal opportunity for interviewers 
to assess their performance.  This will not always be possible at the 
debriefing session, but it may be decided at this session that the interview 
should be reviewed later, if consent has been or can be obtained.  
 
157.  Although the joint approach aims to reduce the number of times a child is 
interviewed, there are a number of reasons why further interviews may be 
necessary.  These are when:   
•  a child who did not give information for whatever reason in the initial interview 
is now willing and able to provide information 
•  new information comes to light from sources other than the child 
•  new allegations emerge (and therefore, wider implications) in the course of 
the initial interview, and extra time is needed to investigate them fully 
•  the child and interviewers have not built up a good rapport 
•  the interviewer has not yet gained the child’s trust 
•  the child is currently too distressed to talk 
•  it becomes apparent during the interview that the child may have additional 
support needs requiring specialist input.   
 
158.  When such circumstances arise, the different agencies should decide 
whether conducting another interview would be in the best interests of the 
child.  
40 

 
 
159.  Interviewers and those overseeing enquiries should always consider carefully 
whether further interviews are necessary and appropriate.  The guidance set 
out here should be followed each time a JII is conducted. 
41 

 
PART 4:  ADDITIONAL SUPPORT NEEDS 
 
160.  Children in the JII setting with additional support needs arising from 
disabilities, sensory impairments or illnesses, should be identified through 
preliminary checks at the referral stage with parents, carers, health 
professionals or educational professionals.  Where appropriate, further 
clarification of additional support needs should be sought by contacting those 
professionals working directly with the child and family, e.g. the primary 
health care team, education professionals, community paediatrician, child 
psychiatrist, psychologist or therapists. 
 
161.  Facilities for visually recorded interviews should be designed and constructed 
to comply with disability access requirements and the Equality Act 2010.  
They should also fully enable any investigative interviews with children with 
additional support needs or disabilities.  Accommodation standards are set 
out at Appendix F.   
 
162.  Very young children, those with first languages other than English, and 
children from ethnic minority backgrounds may also have additional support 
needs in the JII setting, particularly communication needs.  'Cultural' issues 
arising from belonging to specific communities (including in relation to deaf 
children and deaf culture) may also indicate that a child has additional 
support needs.   
 
163.  These factors should be considered and additional support needs identified 
should be taken into account and addressed at the planning stage.  This part 
of the guidance does not cover all the circumstances or factors which may 
indicate additional support needs.  Instead, it focuses on issues around 
interviewing arising from:  
 
•  disabilities, impairments and illness 
•  very young age 
•  where English is not the first language  
•  ethnic considerations.   
 
164.  Paragraphs 173-182 below set out guidance for planning an interview where 
additional support needs have been identified.   
 
Disabilities and illnesses 
165.  Disabilities and illnesses vary widely in terms of type of impairment (e.g. 
physical, sensory, learning, social, communication) and severity of impact on 
the child.  Therefore interviewers should usually seek specialist advice from 
expert professionals familiar with that specific disability and with the child and 
the family.  Expert opinion can advise on how to tailor the interview to the 
child’s particular needs – including the physical setting –to make the 
experience as suitable and as comfortable as possible for all involved.  All 
specialists brought in to assist in preparing for the interview should be 
42 

 
independent from the investigation, qualified, be accredited in their role, and 
have appropriate experience that includes talking to children.   
 
166.  When assessing/considering the child’s needs, the focus should always be: 
“So what are their abilities?”  Even if the child cannot communicate through 
the usual communication media, this should not prevent investigative 
agencies from attempting to obtain their account.  The child should not be 
excluded automatically from the investigative process.  Section 3 of The use 
of special measures for vulnerable witnesses with special support needs 
in 
the guidance pack on the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 (Scottish 
Executive, 2006a) provides more detail about supporting child witnesses with 
additional support needs.   
 
Very young children 
167.  Considerations for this group include the fact that very young children can be 
very attached to familiar figures, particularly a parent or carer.  They can be 
distrustful of strangers and become distressed or avoid contact when left 
alone in rooms with unfamiliar adults.  Unfamiliar surroundings can heighten 
their distress.  Furthermore, pre-school children are more used to interacting 
with adults in play situations rather than serious formal sessions; building 
rapport will be essential and more time may be needed when explaining the 
principles of the investigative interview.   
 
168.  Additional communication needs have to be addressed when interviewing 
very young children, especially through awareness and understanding of how 
very young children use and interpret language.  Young children may still be 
able to provide important evidential information despite providing shorter ‘free 
narrative’ accounts than older children.  Nevertheless, each child may differ in 
this respect and interviewers must always employ the use of free narrative 
opportunities in interviews, remembering that this generally provides the most 
productive and reliable accounts from child witnesses.   
 
When the child’s first language is not English 
169.  A child should, wherever possible, be interviewed in their first language (or, if 
bilingual, the one of their preference).  Only in special circumstances, i.e. 
where an interpreter is not available and there is an immediate need to talk to 
the child, should an exception be made.  Such circumstances do not include 
the JII, but rather would be about establishing whether there are sufficient 
grounds to proceed to a JII or about whether immediate intervention is 
necessary.  Interviewers should be aware that some children who use English 
everyday, for example at school, may revert to using their first language for 
certain terms, e.g. parts of the body. 
 
170.  If an interpreter is required, then they should be someone independent of the 
child’s family and community.  They should be fully briefed as to their role and 
remit during the interview and to the principles of the phased interview.  The 
43 

 
interpreter should also have an understanding of the child’s cultural context 
as well as being able to speak the relevant language.  Further, they should be 
suitably vetted and appropriately accredited if required to appear in court. 
 
171.  The interpreter should be fully aware that they must interpret exactly the 
interviewer’s questions and the child’s responses, and that they should avoid 
making inferences.  Moreover, interpreters should understand their role is not 
to add in or omit anything, but just report what has been said.  Where the use 
of idiom poses a problem in interpretation/translation the interpreter should be 
aware of the need to alert the interviewers and explain the implications for the 
translated version of a question or response.  Such occurrences should be 
recorded in the note of key points.  
 
Ethnicity 
172.  When interviewing children from different backgrounds and heritage, 
interviewers might encounter beliefs and values that are different to their own.  
The child’s culture and customs must always be respected.  The following are 
some points to consider: 
 
•  certain rituals or customs might affect the scheduling of the interview (e.g. 
prayer times, holy days, fasting) 
•  behaviour towards authority figures can vary from culture to culture.  In some 
cultures it is inappropriate for a child to question anything an authority figure 
says.  In this situation, it is essential that the interviewer makes especially 
clear the interview principles described in paragraphs 97-99, for example that 
the child should correct the interviewer if the interviewer makes a mistake 
•  beliefs and practices regarding child rearing can also vary from culture to 
culture. Interviewers should respect that and avoid passing judgement. 
 
Planning an interview for a child with additional support needs 
173.  More time will be needed during the planning phase to gather and assess 
information from all relevant sources.  Detailed guidance is available in 
Information about child, young and vulnerable adult witnesses to inform 
decision-making in the legal process
 (Scottish Executive, 2005).   
 
174.  Planning the interview accommodation for a child with additional support 
needs is particularly important.  The interview should take place in a suitable 
setting – i.e. one able to accommodate any equipment (e.g. a wheelchair), 
free from distractions and noise, with good lighting, etc.  Seating 
arrangements should reflect the needs of the child, as set out in the 
accommodation standards. 
 
175.  If communication boards, other visual aids or signing are to be used, 
interviewers should ensure: 
 
44 

 
•  that a statement is made, before the child enters the room, as to the 
type/model of aid being used 
•  that, if a person is signing, then particular care needs to be taken as to the 
positioning of the interviewer and the child, so that signing can be understood 
by someone watching the recording. 
 
176.  Interviewers should always be conscious that others may wish to observe the 
completed recording and, without compromising the experience of the child, 
do all that is possible to facilitate understanding by those observers.  This will 
include providing an appropriate vocabulary of what the child is being asked. 
 
177.  Very young children and children with learning disabilities may not always 
respond to open-ended prompts.  That being the case, the free narrative 
stage of the interview involves careful planning so that the interviewer may 
begin with a specific question and then follow it with an open-ended prompt.  
Interviewers should still take care to avoid leading the child or influencing 
their responses. 
 
178.  With certain conditions, children may struggle with abstract concepts 
(including ‘trust’, ‘yesterday’, ‘tomorrow’, ‘hot’, ‘cold’, ‘soft’) therefore the 
investigative team will need to consider carefully how to frame suitable 
questions and seek advice. 
 
179.  Children with additional support needs may have a shorter attention span, 
requiring more breaks and shorter sessions. 
 
180.  Consideration of other persons to be present at interview should be part of 
the interview strategy in line with the guidance in paragraphs 54-64.  If a need 
for a facilitator (e.g. an interpreter) is identified, additional time will have to be 
set aside to ensure they are clearly briefed about their role and remit for the 
interview.  This will require some flexible scheduling, not only for planning 
meetings but also for the interview itself. 
 
181.  The facilitator should be independent of the child (not a family member or 
another witness in the investigation).  Planning should include the time 
needed for the facilitator to be introduced to the child and take full part in the 
rapport building stage.  Facilitators should be clear as to their interview role, 
and the child should be made aware that the police officer or social worker is 
the lead interviewer and that all responses should be directed towards them, 
not the facilitator.  
 
182.  In some cases, for instance with a very young child with an impairment, it 
may be that the only person with whom the child will and can communicate 
successfully is the person to whom they are closest and with whom they are 
most familiar, i.e. a parent or carer.  Those planning the interview must 
consider the known or alleged circumstances of the case and decide whether 
the parent or carer can be a suitable facilitator.  Reasons for having a parent, 
carer or other close relative present to facilitate the interview should be 
documented at the planning stage, and their role during the interview made 
clear.  Consideration should be given to having them in the control room to 
45 

 
perform this role with the second interviewer, who can use an earpiece to 
communicate with the lead interviewer.    
 
46 

 
PART 5:  COMPLICATING FACTORS 
 
183.  As well as the additional needs of some children in the JII setting outlined in 
Part 4, investigations may involve complicating factors to be taken into 
account.  Insofar as possible, these should be identified during the pre-
interview planning phase, although some factors may only become apparent 
during the interview stage.  If any complicating factors are highlighted then 
the supervisor/manager should be consulted, and if necessary an alternative 
approach initiated.    
 
184.  Some possible complicating factors include: 
 
•  where the child gives information about further instances of abuse/other 
allegations 
•  when the child witness becomes a suspect 
•  presence of multiple witnesses or suspects in a case 
• institutional 
abuse 
•  children who have been coached before interview 
•  trafficked children or refugee/unaccompanied asylum seeking children  
• lengthy 
time-lapses 
•  family and community loyalty 
•  forced or arranged marriages  
 
When the child witness becomes a suspect 
185.  During the course of the JII, the child may impart some information that 
implicates them in the commission of a criminal offence or suggests they may 
have been complicit in the offence.  If the interviewers conclude that the 
child’s status has changed from that of a witness to that of a suspect, the 
interview should not be terminated immediately.  It should be explained to the 
child that the offence disclosed is a separate matter and will be dealt with 
later.  This will be dependent on the nature of the offence disclosed by the 
child.  Should the interview require to be terminated this should not happen 
abruptly; the child should be allowed to finish any statement they wish to 
make in relation to the subject matter of the joint investigative interview. 
Interviewers will require to, carefully, strike a balance between eliciting as 
much information as possible in relation to the subject matter of the 
investigation, while ensuring that any incriminatory statements have not been 
elicited unfairly.  Interviewers should always remember to end the interview in 
line with guidance on the closure phase. 
 
186.  The decision to bring an investigative interview to a close under these 
circumstances should always be considered very carefully.  The paramount 
consideration for the purpose of the interview is the welfare of the child.  A 
child who may have committed an offence may require protection and may 
have important information regarding their own victimisation and experiences.   
 
47 

 
187.  In such circumstances, a further interview will normally be conducted relating 
to the child’s involvement in the newly emerged alleged criminal offence, 
following established police procedures.  
 
188.  It is impossible to know exactly how an interview will unfold.  Nevertheless, it 
is wise to anticipate such eventualities in the planning phase, and 
interviewers should attempt to have contingency plans prepared.  The 
predominance of the child’s needs and welfare in any question of balance 
with the interests of justice must still be borne in mind.  If the child’s account 
as a victim/witness is considered the main priority and the interview is to 
continue, it should proceed in accordance with this guidance. 
 
Multiple witnesses/suspects   
189.  The need for strategic overview of the interview process with children in 
cases involving multiple witnesses or suspects was raised in the Social Work 
Inspection Agency report The care and protection of children in Eilean Siar 
(Scottish Executive, 2005c).  This is to ensure cross-referencing both within 
and between the programmes of suspect interviews and witness interviews.   
 
190.  While it may not to be possible for the same interviewers to be present at 
each interview, a member of the investigating team should have responsibility 
for the strategic overview, usually the senior investigating officer.  This could 
be a trained police interview adviser, or could be the police officer or social 
worker supervising the joint interviewers.   
 
191.  Decisions about the need for strategic overview of the JIIs, alongside cross 
referencing should be taken as soon as multiple witnesses/suspects are 
identified by the investigation.  Nevertheless, each interview in the process 
should be conducted in line with the guidance. 
 
192.  While clarification relating to other children’s evidence may be needed, there 
is a particular danger of interviewer bias arising in such cases, and of 
(mis)leading a child.  The guidance in the section on questioning (paragraphs 
119-144) should be followed in questioning children considerately, and only 
after they have finished their own free narrative and giving their own account.   
 
Institutional abuse  
193.  This includes allegations of 'in care' abuse.  These are likely to involve 
multiple witnesses and multiple interviews of single witnesses.  They also 
require careful planning of interviews and cross referencing of witness 
allegations and statements (see paragraph 189 above).  These interviews 
also involve serious consideration of repercussions for children in disclosing, 
which needs to be addressed during the planning and debriefing stages.  
Equally there are issues for timescales for conducting interviews if suspects 
may still have contact/charge of children or vulnerable people.  
 
48 

 
194.  Where abuse is alleged to have occurred in an institutional setting for which 
the local authority concerned has responsibility, all steps should be taken to 
ensure that the management of the enquiry within the social work service, or 
other responsible agency is not undertaken by those with direct line or any 
previous management responsibility for the unit/institution concerned. 
 
Children who may have been coached before interview 
195.  There is a need for all interviewers to consider explicitly the possibility or 
probability that a child may have been subject to coaching prior to the 
interview process.  This issue may arise where a parent or carer is involved in 
the allegations, and also may arise if there are any ongoing divorce, 
separation, child abduction, residence or contact issues in the family.  For 
these reasons, it is very ill-advised ever to have any third party present at JII 
who has an interest in the custody of the child or in the parental relationship. 
Care should be given in relation to the presence of third parties such as 
grandparents or any person who may have an interest in the outcome of the 
interview.  Paragraphs 56-58 above give further guidance on this.   
 
196.  Consideration of coaching needs to be addressed at both the planning and 
debriefing stages.  The emphasis should be on asking appropriate questions. 
(see paragraph 102).   
 
Children trafficked or refugee/unaccompanied asylum seeking children   
197.  Any fears that the witness may have as a result of speaking about what 
happened need to be explicitly considered, including fears about leave to 
remain/retribution/deportation.  As well as being considered such fears need 
to be specifically addressed during the rapport building phase and when 
setting out the interview guidelines.  Interviewers should be aware that 
children can be trafficked from within their own country, not just abroad.  
Scottish Government guidance on Safeguarding Children in Scotland who 
may have been Trafficked
 can be found at  - 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/02/18092546/0 
 
198.  There may be certain barriers to communication other than language.  Some 
children from asylum-seeking families, for example, may have had previous 
negative experiences of law enforcement or social services in their country of 
origin.  Such issues should be considered in advance of the JII (i.e. during the 
planning stage) and also at the debriefing stage and be treated with due care 
and consideration.   
Lengthy time-lapse  
199.  In time-lapse cases the child may have serious difficulties in providing 
detailed recall of events, especially in relation to multiple incidents (i.e. re-
victimisation by different perpetrators in separate or unrelated incidents in the 
intervening period).  Time-lapse is also a factor in historical abuse cases.   
49 

 
 
200.  Planning the interview in such cases should include strategies for questioning 
in the event that the free narrative technique cannot be fully used.   
Family and community loyalty 
201.  The potential for public or familial shame can be a major determinant of how 
co-operative the child and family are with the investigation (a child disclosing 
allegations of abuse might fear retribution from the family and the 
community). 
 
202.  In smaller or rural communities, additional care needs to be taken when 
considering specialist assistance, particularly when selecting people to help 
with communication needs.  In such communities, it may be difficult to identify 
suitable specialists locally; as noted earlier (see paragraph 170) specialists 
must be independent of the investigation in order to ensure accuracy of the 
child’s communication, and to avoid any potential intimidation of the child. It 
may also prove difficult to recruit local specialists who are accredited for the 
role, and who have sufficient experience in talking to children, in which case 
suitable specialists may have to be recruited from elsewhere.   
50 

 
PART 6:  USE OF AND AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR VISUAL 
RECORDINGS  
 
203.  The aim of this section is to describe the uses of the recordings, and the 
responsibilities that agencies have when using them and making them 
available.  It sets out national guidance that should be applied. 
 
204.  On occasions where, after the initial investigative phase, after thorough 
investigation there is an insufficiency of evidence in law for the police to 
report the circumstances to the PF;  and it is decided that a referral to the 
children’s reporter is not required, the recording should be retained according 
to police or local authority retention policy.  In other cases a report will be 
made to the PF, children’s reporter or both, depending on the circumstances. 
Where a police report has been passed to the PF /Children’s Reporter, this 
must also include the note of salient points taken during the interview and 
agreed between the police officer and social worker following the interview  
 
Handling and copying recordings 
 
205.  At the conclusion of each interview the recording equipment will 
simultaneously produce 2 DVD discs.  One disk will be a master copy and the 
other a working copy.  It must be noted that the master copy will remain 
as an unedited version of the original interview and be preserved at all 
times.
 
 
206.  In addition a third copy may be required.  It is not possible to predict all the 
circumstances where this may occur, however they may include: 
•  copy for the defence or other party in civil proceedings where a court 
instructs a copy be made available to the defence 
•  copy for the Children’s Reporter where a referral has been made to the 
Reporter as a result of a JII. 
 
207.  Third (or subsequent) copies require authorisation of at least the rank of 
Police Inspector. 
 
208.  The Initial Referral Discussion should consider if, based on existing 
information, a third copy will be required and arrange for this to be obtained.  
The content of all interviews must be reviewed at their conclusion and 
consideration given to what agencies require a copy of the interview. In all 
circumstances additional copies must only be made where there are very 
good reasons for doing so.  If there is a case made out for a copy to be 
provided, the copying should be done by the police, with the copy itself 
released only against a receipted signature.  The default position will always 
be for two copies. 
 
209.  It is vital that the production of additional copies is documented and an audit 
trail maintained to clearly show the location of all copies at all times. It should 
also record when the copies have been destroyed.  
 
51 

 
210.  By their very nature, JII recordings may contain an element of inadmissible 
evidence such as hearsay evidence that would not be shown in criminal court 
proceedings.  Similarly, there may be a need to edit recordings where the 
interview contains sensitive and or immaterial information.  Under the terms 
of a protocol agreement between COPFS and ACPOS, editing of JII 
recordings must only be carried out by ACPOS under instruction from 
COPFS. 
 
211.  Under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), any organisation 
holding a JII recording has a duty to keep them safe, secure and to prevent 
any unauthorised use or access.  The Police, Procurator Fiscal and the 
Children’s Reporter should have their own security, retention and disposal 
procedures in place to ensure compliance with DPA.  
 
212.  Handling and storage of disks will be in accordance with the handling of 
RESTRICTED material under the Government Protective Marking Scheme 
(GPMS).  Definition of RESTRICTED and obligations under GPMS are 
outlined in Appendix G. 
 
Points of principle 
213.  Visual recordings of joint investigative interviews require to be properly 
protected in order prevent them being viewed inappropriately and to reassure 
children who are interviewed and those with parental responsibility for such 
children. 
 
214.  Visual recordings must be made available where material and relevant in 
order to facilitate proper preparation of a defence in criminal cases and 
proper representation of parties in other cases, unless there are overriding 
considerations that justify non-disclosure.  This is necessary in order to 
ensure compliance with the right to a fair hearing in terms of article 6 of 
ECHR.   
215.  Where decisions about family life fall to be taken on the basis of an 
investigative interview, the families of the children concerned must have 
access to the visual recording to the extent necessary to allow them 
involvement in the decision-making process, in order to ensure respect for 
their family life in terms of article 8 of ECHR, unless there are overriding 
considerations which would justify interference with such rights which may 
result in non-disclosure of the recording.  In reaching a decision the clear 
focus must always be the paramount welfare of the child. 
 
Practice to be followed 
216.  In criminal cases, when COPFS decide that a recording is to be used as a 
production, the police will prepare a transcript of the recording and COPFS 
will decide what in their view is disclosable to the defence.  In cases where it 
is alleged that a sexual crime has been committed an accused person will be 
52 

 
represented and solicitors are under a professional obligation in relation to 
sensitive material (see Criminal Code of Conduct, article 11).    
 
217.  In criminal cases in which the recording is disclosable, COPFS will provide 
the defence with details of the recording and its location, in order to allow the 
defence to make arrangements to view the recording, or an edited copy (if 
any non-disclosable information requires to be withheld).  Access to view the 
recording will be given to the defence solicitor, counsel and any expert 
instructed.  Access will be given on further occasions if necessary (unless a 
request for access is unreasonable).   
 
Requests to view recordings  
218.  Requests for the accused or other persons to see the visual recording may be 
made to COPFS.  The sensitive nature of the recording means that it should 
only be shown to the accused where this is necessary in the particular 
circumstances of the case.  All issues of timing should be carefully 
considered.  
 
219.  Where there are circumstances which require the accused to see the 
recording, access will be provided.  A request for access will be refused if it is 
not in the public interest to accede to the request, or if disclosure will put the 
child at risk of harm or interfere with the child’s right to privacy in terms of 
article 8 of ECHR.  If a request is refused the person seeking access may 
make an application to the appropriate court.   
 
Viewing of recordings 
220.  If it has been agreed that the accused should see the recording, or the court 
has ordered access for the accused, the disclosable version of the recording 
will be made available for viewing only by the accused together with the 
defence solicitor and if appropriate counsel and any expert instructed.  
 
221.  Practical arrangements will be required for viewing the recording for persons 
in custody or otherwise unable to attend to see the recording.  The recording 
should not be released to any person although the accused, solicitor, counsel 
and expert should be given an opportunity to view the recording in private.  
Suitable arrangements should be made to ensure that recordings are not 
made while viewing takes place and after the viewing, the recording should 
be returned to safe storage.  
 
Precognition 
222.  All parties should seek to minimise or avoid the need for precognition of the 
child.  The defence should be encouraged to view any recording before 
arranging for a precognition of the child witness and to consider whether 
precognition is necessary and appropriate.  Where only certain points require 
53 

 
to be clarified by the defence, consideration should be given to the option of 
asking the Procurator Fiscal to investigate those matters as part of any Crown 
precognition.  Procurators Fiscals have a crucial role in facilitating this.   
 
Copies of recordings held by other agencies 
223.  Other persons who have copies of the recordings, such as social work 
departments or the Children’s Reporter, will be expected to operate on a 
similar basis to that outlined in paragraph 218.  
 
Family life concerns 
224.  Practitioners should bear in mind the current guidance of the European Court 
of Human Rights in TP and KM v United Kingdom (2002) 34 EHRR 2.  In 
principle this will mean that in cases where respect for family life is involved 
(i.e. where the child may be removed from home or contact with the child 
restricted, in circumstances that are a matter of dispute) recordings should 
generally be made available at an early stage for viewing by persons with 
parental responsibility for the child. 
 
225.  In cases in which there is also an ongoing criminal investigation, where 
criminal proceedings are under consideration or where there are live criminal 
proceedings the Procurator Fiscal should be consulted prior to any decision 
on access to the recording being taken.  In such cases consideration will 
require to be given to the need to balance the rights of families, victims and 
those accused.  
 
226.   There will be cases where the authority holding the recording does not 
consider it appropriate to give access.  The matter should be put before the 
court for adjudication as soon as practicable.  The application should, where 
practicable, be made by the authority holding the recording.  Access should 
generally be provided via solicitors who will be expected to give undertakings 
to supervise all client access and not to permit clients to retain or make 
copies or transcripts of recordings. 
 
Use of recordings by the Children’s Reporter 
227.  In children’s hearings court proceedings, the Children’s Reporter will 
generally give access to the recording only if information in the recording 
forms evidence, or part of the evidence, in grounds for referral and those 
grounds for referral are being contested before the sheriff.  The Reporter will 
only give access to the persons who are parties to these proceedings. Access 
should generally be provided via solicitors, as outlined in paragraph 226 
above.   
 
54 

 
Adjudication 
228.  It is recognised that visual recordings of interviews are a new departure and 
that guidance cannot cover every situation in which they may or may not be 
disclosed.  It is to be expected that the court will be required to adjudicate and 
that the position will become clearer as case law emerges. 
 
Using the recordings for other child protection purposes or other court 
proceedings 

229.  There may also be a need for on-going social work involvement to manage 
any risk, supervise the child, or further assess need.  There may be also be a 
need for other court proceedings such as, residence, contact disputes, child 
abduction or divorce proceedings though the list is not exhaustive.   
 
230.  Recordings should be used as a means of bringing new case workers up to 
date, especially if this will avoid the need for the child to be interviewed again.  
Any such use should be agreed with the officer in charge of the log, and also 
recorded in it.   
Transcription 
231.  Transcription is a very time consuming process and is not routinely required.   
 
232.  Where there is a good reason to require a transcript (e.g. for use court 
proceedings), great care must be taken to ensure that the transcript not only 
captures the verbal content of the interview but also includes references to 
any non-verbal actions or responses.  The contents of the transcript should 
be checked and confirmed by the interviewers.  
 
233.  If the case is going to proceed to court then it is essential that transcripts are 
checked with great care.  The full transcript will require to be lodged prior to 
the production of any edited copies.  It is useful for the sheriff or judge and 
jury members to have a transcription of the evidence to be presented.  If there 
are to be Children’s Hearings court proceedings, then a full transcript may 
need to be lodged (see paragraph 232)  
 
234.  If the recording is edited, for example to remove hearsay evidence or 
evidence relating to a different alleged offence, only the edited version of the 
transcript will be required for those who will view the recording.   
 
235.  There is always the possibility that a plea will be entered.  This means there 
is a balance of timing to be struck.  If in doubt however, a transcription should 
be undertaken.  Defence requests for transcriptions should also be made to 
the PF. 
 
236.  In children’s hearings court proceedings, when the application is in relation to 
grounds which involve an allegation of an offence by the child, the criminal 
55 

 
standard of proof is required.  In these cases the need for transcription will be 
the same as for criminal proceedings.  
 
237.  Maximising audio quality helps minimise the need for transcription.  Any 
transcriptions made must be stored securely with the recordings and other 
records.  Under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, any organisation 
holding JII recordings (or transcriptions) has a duty to keep them safe, secure 
and to prevent any unauthorised use (see Appendix G).  
Using recordings in court 
238.  The use of a visual recording as evidence in chief in criminal trials is a special 
measure under the VWA, and applications to deal with the child’s evidence in 
this way should be included in the child witness notice.   
 
239.  The other special measures available to child witnesses under the VWA 
should not be overlooked for use when a child is watching the recording 
and/or being cross-examined.  These will also need to be sought on the child 
witness notice in advance and can include, giving evidence from behind a 
screen in the court room; over a live CCTV link from another room in the court 
or other building; using a support person in court; or by precognition.     
 
240.  Almost all Scottish courthouses have facilities to play DVDs, but not all 
courtrooms are permanently equipped and the availability of live TV links and 
remote locations particularly may be limited.  This means that facilities need 
to be ‘booked’ and this is done through the Electronic Service Delivery Unit 
(ESDU) of the Scottish Courts Service (SCS).   
 
241.  Allowing a witness to refresh his or her memory by showing the witness the 
recording the day before the hearing is common practice in courts in England 
and Wales.  Section 85 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 
2010 makes provision for witnesses to refresh their memory by seeing their 
witness statement when giving evidence.  Under the VWA, if a previous 
statement is to be used as evidence-in-chief, there is no need for the witness 
to adopt the statement.  However, the child may be asked to watch the 
recording, or an edited version before being asked questions in cross 
examination 
 
242.  Admitting the recording as evidence-in-chief does not remove the 
requirement for the child to be available for cross examination in criminal 
proceedings unless there are exceptional circumstances (under section 259 
of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995).  If a visual recording is to be 
played, then the Crown is aware of the possibility that a child witness’s first 
experience of giving evidence might be cross examination.  Therefore the 
prosecution may assist the child witness by clarifying part of their evidence in 
examination in chief.   
 
243.  In civil proceedings, visual recordings can be used as evidence because the 
use of hearsay evidence is permissible.  They can be routinely used by the 
children’s reporter for instance, as the main evidence in court proceedings 
56 

 
relevant to Children’s Hearings where the burden of proof is lower and 
evidence does not need to be corroborated. The exception to this is in 
relation to a ground of referral which involves an offence by the child, where 
the standard of proof is the criminal standard.  Cross examination may still be 
required.  In other forms of court proceedings the use or otherwise of the 
visual recording will be subject to application to the sheriff of judge. 
 
244.  A change to both Court of Session and Sheriff Court civil rules has been 
requested to ensure that access to these sensitive productions is limited to 
appropriate persons (for example the defence and relevant expert witnesses), 
they are not borrowable from court processes without the consent of the 
Judge/Sheriff and that any viewing takes place at an appropriate location 
under specified conditions.   
 
 
57 

 
PART 7: REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING  
 

245.  The guidance set out in this document is based on extensive psychological 
research as well as studies of actual investigative interviews including those 
undertaken in the Scottish visual recording pilots.  The practices and 
principles mirror those set out in current training guidelines for professionals 
who interview children throughout Western Europe and North America.   
 
246.  This section provides a list of further reading and also contains references to 
the research and policy documents cited in this guidance.   
 
247.  For ease of reference these texts are listed under the following headings: 
 
•  Reviews of the literature 
• Scottish 
legislation 
•  Scottish policy documents 
• Scottish 
guidance 
 
•  Research and review reports 
•  England and Wales guidance 
 
Reviews of the literature 
Aldridge, M. and Wood, J. (1998) Interviewing Children: A Guide for Child Care and 
Forensic Practitioners Chichester: Wiley (Series on Child Care and Protection) 
Berliner, Lucy, & Conte, Jon R. (1995). The effects of disclosure and intervention on 
sexually abused children. Child Abuse and Neglect, 19(3), 371-384 
Brubacher, S. P., Roberts, K. P., & Powell, M. (2011). Effects of practicing episodic 
versus scripted recall on children’s subsequent narratives of a repeated event. 
Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 17, 286-314. 
Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., Francoeur, E., & Renick, A. (1995) ‘Anatomically detailed dolls 
do not facilitate pre-schoolers' reports of a paediatric examination involving 
genital touch’.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 95-109 
Bull, R. (2010). The investigative interviewing of children and other vulnerable 
witnesses: Psychological research and working/ professional practice. Legal 
Criminological Psychology, 15, 5–23. 
Bussey, K. (1992) ‘Lying and truthfulness: Children’s definitions, standards and 
evaluative reactions’ Child Development, 63, 129-137 
Richard L. Cage and Donna M. Pence. (2006) Criminal Investigation of Child Sexual 
Abuse, Washington: US Justice Department, Juvenile Justice Resource Centre 
portable guides to investigating child abuse series 
Eisen, M., Quas, J. & Goodman, G. (2002) Memory and Suggestibility in the 
Forensic Interview, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 
Ellison, L. (2001) ‘The mosaic art?: Cross-examination and the vulnerable witness’, 
Legal Studies, 21, 353-375 
Graffam Walker, A. (1999) Handbook on Questioning Children: A Linguistic 
Perspective (2nd edn), Washington DC: ABA Centre on Children and the Law 
Kuehnle & Connell (2009). The Evaluation of Child Sexual Abuse Allegations: A 
Comprehensive Guide to Assessment and Testimony. Wiley. 
58 

 
Lamb, Michael, E, Hershkowitz, I, Orbach, Y and Esplin, Phillip W (2008) Tell me 
what happened: structured investigative interviews of child victims and 
witnesses
, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell 
Lamb, La Rooy, Malloy, & Katz (2011). Children’s Testimony: A Handbook of 
Psychological Research and Forensic Practice (2nd Edition). Wiley-Blackwell. 
Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Sternberg, K. J., Hershkowitz, I., & Horowitz, D. (2000) 
Accuracy of investigators’ verbatim notes of their forensic interviews with alleged 
child abuse victims. Law and Human Behaviour, 24, 699-708. 
Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Esplin, P. W., & Horowitz, D. (2007). A 
structured forensic interview protocol improves the quality and the 
informativeness of investigative interviews with children: A review of research 
using the NICHD investigative interview Protocol. Child Abuse and Neglect, 
31, 
1201-1231.  
La Rooy, D., Lamb, M. E., & Memon, A. (2010) Forensic interviews with children in 
Scotland: A survey of interview practice among police. Journal of Police and 
Criminal Psychology, 26, 
26-34. 
London, K., Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., Shuman, D. (2005) Disclosure of child sexual 
abuse: What does the research tell us about the ways that children tell? 
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,  11, 194–226. 
Lyon, T.D. & Saywitz, K. (1999) ‘Young maltreated children’s competence to take the 
oath’ Applied Developmental Science, 3, 16-27 
Lyon, T.D., Saywitz,  K., Kaplan, D.L. & Dorado, J. (2001) Reducing maltreated 
children’s reluctance to answer hypothetical oath-taking competency questions, 
Law and Human Behaviour 25, 81-92 
Marchant, R. & Page, M. (1993) Bridging the Gap: Child Protection Work with 
Children with Multiple Disabilities London: NSPCC 
Poole, D. & Lamb, M. (1998) Investigative Interviews with Children: A Guide for 
Helping Professionals, American Psychological Association: DC 
Poole, D. A., Bruck, M., & Pipe, M-E. (2011). Forensic interviewing aids: Do props 
help children answer questions about touching? Current Direction in 
Psychological Science, 20, 
 11-15. 
Powell, M.B., Wilson, C. & Croft, C.M. (2001) ‘The effect of uniform and prior 
knowledge on children’s event reports and disclosure of secrets’ Police and 
Criminal Psychology
, 15, 27 -40 
Saywitz, Karen J. and Kathleen Coulborn Faller (2006) Interviewing Child Witnesses 
and Victims of Sexual Abuse, Washington: US Justice Department, Juvenile 
Justice Resource Centre portable guides to investigating child abuse series  
Karen J. Saywitz;  Lynn Snyder; Rebecca Nathanson (1999) Facilitating the 
Communicative Competence of the Child Witness, Applied Developmental 
Science
, Volume3 Issue 1 March, pp58 - 68 
Steward, M.S., & Steward, D.S (with Farquahar, L., Myers, J.E.B., Reinart M., 
Welker, J., Joye, N., Driskll, J., & Morgan, J.) (1996) Interviewing young 
children about body touch and handling
, Monographs of the society for 
Research in Child Development, 61, (4-5 Serial No. 248) 
Warren, A.R. & Woodall, C.E. (1999) ‘How well do interviewers recall their interviews 
with children?’ Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 355-371 
White, T.L., Leichtman, M.D. & Ceci, S.J. (1997) ‘The good, the bad, and the ugly: 
Accuracy, inaccuracy, and elaboration in pre-schoolers’ reports about a past 
event’ Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, S37-S54 
 
59 

 
Scottish legislation 
Children (Scotland) Act 1995  
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/Ukpga_19950036_en_1.htm 
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/Ukpga_19950046_en_1.htm 
Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 http://www.scotland-
legislation.hmso.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/acts2004/20040003.htm 
Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009  
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/contents 
Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 
 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/13/contents 
Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2011/1/contents 
 
Scottish policy documents 
Crown Office (2007) Lord Advocate’s Guidelines to the police providing information 
on vulnerable adult witnesses
http://www.crownoffice.gov.uk/Publications/2007/03/LAGuidVulnWit 
Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service (2006) Crown Practice Statement issued by 
the Lord Advocate in relation to the provision of information by the Crown in 
High Court cases
 http://www.copfs.gov.uk/Publications/2006/06/Crown-
Practice-Statement-issued-Lord-Advocate-relation-Provision-Information-
Crown-High-Court-Cases 
Law Society of Scotland (undated) Code of Conduct for Criminal Work 
http://www.lawscot.org.uk/rules-and-guidance/section-f/division-a-criminal-
work/guidance/the-code-of-conduct-for-criminal-work 
Scottish Executive (2002) Vital Voices: Helping Vulnerable Witnesses Give 
Evidence, Consultation Paper. 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2002/05/14621/3802 
Scottish Executive (2003) Vital Voices: Helping Vulnerable Witnesses Give 
Evidence, Policy Statement 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/02/16453/18641 
Scottish Office (1997) Towards a Just Conclusion: vulnerable and intimidated 
witnesses in Scottish court cases
, Edinburgh: HMSO, 
        http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents-w3/tajc-00.htm
 Scottish Office (1998) Protecting Children: a shared responsibility 
 
http://
 
www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents-w3/pch-00.htm
Visual Recording Pilots National Steering Group (2005) Visually recorded 
interviewing of child witnesses in Scotland Interim report of the National 
Steering Group, March 2005, unpublished 
Visual Recording Pilots National Steering Group (2005) Draft protocol on disclosure, 
editing, precognition and transcription, 25 March 2005, unpublished 
 
60 

 
Scottish guidance 
Guidance on support for child witnesses for practitioners 
 
Scottish Executive (undated) Supporting Child Witnesses Guidance Pack 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/law/victims-witnesses/guidance-
information/child-witnesses-1 
Scottish Executive (2003) Guidance on interviewing child witnesses in Scotland 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/09/18265/27033  
Scottish Executive (2003a) Guidance on the questioning of children in court
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/47176/0025085.pdf 
Lord Justice-General's Memorandum on Child Witnesses (2003)- Appendix to 
Guidance on the questioning of children in court document
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/47049/0025079.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2004) Guidance on child witness court familiarisation visits, 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/05/19308/36511 
Scottish Executive (2005) Information about child, young and vulnerable adult 
witnesses to inform decision-making in the legal process: Good practice 
guidance
, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/35596/0024977.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2005a) Code of Practice to facilitate the provision of therapeutic 
support to child witnesses in court proceedings
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/35596/0024976.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2005b) Guidance on the conduct of identity parades with child 
witnesses, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/77843/0018526.pdf 
Scottish Government (2010) National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland  
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/12/09134441/21 
 
 
Guidance on support for child witnesses for children and young people 
 
Scottish Executive (2005) Being a Witness:  a booklet for children in Children’s 
Hearing court proceedings
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/06/2984605/46143 
Scottish Executive (2005) Being a Witness: a booklet for children in criminal 
proceedings, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/55971/0015246.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2005) Being a Witness: An information booklet for young people 
in Children’s Hearing court proceedings
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/54357/0014352.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2005) Being a Witness: A booklet for young people in criminal 
proceedings, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/54357/0014437.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2005) Video identity parades: a booklet for children and young 
people, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/77843/0018523.pdf 
 
Guidance on support for child witnesses for parents and carers 
 
Scottish Executive (2005) Your child is attending a video identity parade: a booklet 
for parents and carers
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/10/14104354/43553 
 
61 

 
Scottish Executive (2005) Your child is a witness: a booklet for parents and carers, 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/54357/0014186.pdf 
 
Guidance on support for vulnerable witnesses 
 
Scottish Executive (2006) Being A Witness: the use of special measures, a booklet 
for adult witnesses in criminal and Children’s Hearing court proceedings, 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/113145/0027428.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2006) Being a Witness: I am a Witness in Court- a guide for 
people with learning disabilities
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/152425/0040997.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2006) Being a witness: Helping people with learning disabilities 
who go to court- a guide for carers, 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/152441/0040998.pdf 
 
Guidance on support for vulnerable witnesses for practitioners 
 
Scottish Court Service Protocol for allocation and management of live TV link 
facilities
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/courtusers/witnesses/vulnerablewitness.asp 
Scottish Executive (2006a) Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act (2004) Special 
measures for vulnerable adult and child witnesses a guidance pack, updated 
May 2008 to include Therapeutic support for adults and Addendum to 
vulnerable witnesses with special needs
 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/1099/0060018.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2006) Supporting witnesses in the Scottish justice system 
information guide, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/1099/0054929.pdf 
Scottish Executive (2007) Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act information guide
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/204451/0054415.pdf 
 
Research and review reports 
Burton, M. Evans, R. and Sanders, A. (2006) Are special measures for vulnerable 
and intimidated witnesses working? Evidence from the criminal justice agencies 
Home Office Online Report 01/06 
http://library.npia.police.uk/docs/hordsolr/rdsolr0106.pdf 
Christie D. and Moody S. (1999) The work of precognition agents in criminal cases
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/kd01/precog/precognition-00.htm 
Clyde, J.J. (1992). Report of the Inquiry into the Removal of Children from Orkney in 
February 1999, Edinburgh: HMSO 
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc9293/hc01/0195/0195.asp 
Coulsfield (2007) Review of the Law and Practice of Disclosure in Scotland, Scottish 
Government, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/09/11092705/0 
Davies, G. and Westcott, H. (1999) Interviewing child witnesses under the 
memorandum of good practice: a research review, Police Research Series 115, 
Home Office London http://library.npia.police.uk/docs/hopolicers/fprs115.pdf 
Davies, G., Wilson, C., Mitchell, R. and Milsom, J. (1995) Videotaping Children's 
Evidence: An Evaluation, Home Office Research and Statistics Department 
62 

 
Research Findings, Number 20 London: Home Office Publications Unit  
http://library.npia.police.uk/docs/hofindings/r20.pdf 
Hamlyn, B. Phelps A., Turtle J. and Sattar, G. (2004) Are special measures working? 
Evidence from surveys of vulnerable and intimidated witnesses, HORS 283 
Home Office, 22 June 2004 http://library.npia.police.uk/docs/hors/hors283.pdf  
HMIC (2007) Common Knowledge: Thematic Inspection on Intelligence and 
Information Sharing, Edinburgh: Scottish Executive 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/169855/0047328.pdf 
HMIC Joint Thematic Report on Victims in the Criminal justice System – Phase I 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/10/08133638/0 
HMIC Joint Thematic Report on Victims in the Criminal justice System – Phase II 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/11/08112834/0 
Marshall, K., Kay, E., Tisdall, M. and Cleland, A. (2002) 'Voice of the Child' Under 
the Children (Scotland) Act 1995: Giving due regard to children’s views in all 
matters that affect them
 Scottish Executive 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/kd01/red/voc1-00.asp  
Murray, K. (1995) Live Television Link: An Evaluation of its Use by Child Witnesses 
in Scottish Criminal Trials, Crime and Criminal Justice Research Findings No.4 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfinds/crf04-00.htm 
Plotnikoff, J. and Woolfson, R. (2001) An Evaluation of Child Witness Support
Edinburgh: The Stationery Office, 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/kd01/purple/witness-00.htm 
Plotnikoff, J. and Woolfson, R. (2004) In their own words.  The experiences of 50 
young witnesses in criminal proceedings NSPCC and Victim Support 
Reid Howie Associates (2002) Vulnerable and intimidated witnesses: review of 
provisions in other jurisdictions, Scottish Executive Central Research Unit 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfinds/viwp-00.asp   
Report of the Child Protection Audit and Review "It's everyone's job to make sure I'm 
alright" http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2002/11/15820/14009 
Richards, P., Morris, S., Richards E. and Siddall, K. (2007) On the record: Evaluating 
the visual recording of joint investigative interviews with children Scottish 
Executive: Edinburgh 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/01/10121853/0 
Richards, P., Morris, S., Richards E. (2006) National guidance on visual recording of 
JIIs with children, unpublished draft 
Scottish Executive (2005c) An inspection into the care and protection of children in 
Eilean Siar, Social Work Inspection Agency August 2005 
http://www.scswis.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid
=197&Itemid=703 

 
England and Wales guidance 
Home Office/Crown Prosecution Service/Department of Health (2001) Provision of 
Therapy for Child Witnesses Prior to a Criminal Trial: Practical Guidance
London: Crown Prosecution Service 
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/therapychild.html 
 
63 

 
UK Government (2011) Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance 
on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special 
measures Achieving best evidence 
 
 
United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm 
 
64 

 
 
APPENDICES 
 
Appendix A - provides an overview of conducting the investigative interview. 
Current research indicates that interviewers find a highly structured interview 
protocol 
easiest to use and most effective.  
 
Appendix B - provides an overview on the role of supervisors and managers in 
briefing and debriefing practitioners. 
 
Appendix C
 - outlines the benefits of visually recording joint investigative interviews. 
   
Appendix D - provides an information leaflet on consent for children, their parents or 
carers. 
  
Appendix E - provides a sample of a ‘child friendly’ consent form.  
 
Appendix F - outlines the categories of interview suites, the accommodation 
standards expected and the level of equipment to be installed in each category.   
 
Appendix G
 – provides guidance on the restricted classification of visual recordings 
along with data handling standards.
65 

 
APPENDIX A:  Quick Guide: Conducting the investigative interview 
 
1. 
At the planning meeting  
 
•  any reason not to visually record? 
•  any special needs? 
• equipment 
available/location? 
•  is this a complex case needing special arrangements? 
•  agree who will lead, and signals if one interviewer is to be in the control 
room 
•  discuss whether support person is necessary  
 
2. 
Prepare the interview setting 
 
•  ensure there will be no interruptions (e.g. unplug telephones, switch off 
mobiles) 
•  remove any distracting material 
•  ensure adequate seating and equipment are available and laid out in a 
‘child-friendly’ arrangement  
•  insert new DVDs  
•  check camera angles and focus and carry out other technical checks 
•  record reasons, time and date, officers involved, child’s name and age 
 
3. 
Information about the interview and its record 
 
•  inform the child and their parent/carer that an interview is being undertaken 
and how it is to be recorded 
•  check understanding and allow child to ask questions 
•  do not imply that recording means no further interviews 
•  if child objects, reconsider visually recording – may use audio recording 
only option and/or written record instead 
•  brief support person where one is to be present for any part of the interview 
 
4. Introductions 
 

•  state date and start and end times for the record 
•  introduce yourself to the child, giving name, occupation and role (in a 
general way; don’t mention words such as “risk” and “child protection”) 
•  allow child to settle; have brief “icebreaker” chat about neutral event (e.g. 
TV) Avoid using reference to school as an “icebreaker” chat as the child’s 
experience of school is unlikely to be known to the interviewer 
•  avoid mentioning the allegation and avoid instilling any stereotypes 
about the alleged perpetrator 
 
 
 
 
 
 

66 

 
 
5. 
Establish the interview principles; not just a litany at start but throughout 
 
•  the child will do most of the talking 
•  the interviewer wasn’t there so needs the child’s help to understand what 
happened 
•  it is OK to say “I don’t know/remember/understand” and to correct the 
interviewer when they get something wrong 
•  the child should not guess, or make up any answers.  They should always 
tell the truth (i.e. what they know from having seen with their own eyes, 
heard with their own ears, etc.) 
•  if questions are repeated this does not mean the child’s first answer was 
wrong or thought to be a lie 
 
6. 
Reminders for interviewers 
 
•  the recording includes pace, pauses, questions and body language of both 
interviewer and child, and anyone else (such as a supporter) present  
•  the interview should follow the child’s pace 
•  be tolerant of pauses; don’t interrupt the child 
•  be aware of signs of fatigue or loss of concentration.  Let the child know 
how long the interview might take and when breaks will be available 
•  keep an open mind  
 
7. Second 
interviewer 
 
•  take note of salient points only; remember that these will be submitted in 
evidence  
•  focus on monitoring the interview, welfare of the child, alerting lead 
interviewer of points to probe  
•  agree to use prearranged signals to contribute when invited 
•  if in control room, check one camera focused on child’s face throughout and 
other shows a view of the whole room including everyone present 
 
8. 
Complete rapport building with a practice interview 
 
•  ask the child to recall a neutral personally-experienced event (e.g. a 
holiday) 
•  tell them to report everything they remember about the event from 
beginning to end 
•  avoid specific questions 
•  encourage a spontaneous narrative from the child using facilitators, e.g. 
“That sounds interesting, tell me more” 
 
9. 
Raising topic of concern 
 
•  raise the topic, beginning with the least suggestive prompt 
•  if this is not successful, proceed gradually onto more specific prompts 
67 

 
•  avoid suggesting any wrongdoing (e.g. by using words such as “hurt”, 
“bad”) 
 
10. Free 
narrative 
 
•  encourage a spontaneous account from the child using general probes, e.g. 
“Tell me about that” 
•  use open-ended prompts to follow when the child has finished speaking, 
e.g. “And then what happened?” 
•  also use facilitators to keep the narrative flowing, e.g. “uh huh” 
 
11. Questioning 
 

•  refer back to things that the child has mentioned previously in free narrative 
•  try to determine whether the episode of abuse was single or repeated 
•  try to cover the sequence of topics in the same order as the child raised 
them 
•  use the least direct/specific types of questions wherever possible 
•  clarify any ambiguities, inconsistencies, or unfamiliar terms/names used by 
the child, in a way that does not imply suspicion, disbelief or mockery  
 
12. Closure 
 

•  summarise main evidential points using child’s language as much as 
possible 
•  check whether second interviewer has any questions 
•  ask child if they have any questions 
•  don’t make promises that cannot be kept 
•  provide contact names/addresses/numbers 
•  thank child for their time 
•  revert to neutral topics 
 
13. Afterwards 
 

•  ask parent, carer or child to sign the consent form  
•  obtain recording number from log 
•  seal master copy of DVDs with evidence labels  
•  store in secure location 
•  arrange the debriefing session with further action to be considered 
68 

 
APPENDIX B:  Briefing and Debriefing - role of Supervisors and Managers 
 
Planning a Joint Investigative Interview is the responsibility of both police and social 
work services and should take account of the key planning points listed after 
paragraph 25.  Along with considering planning issues, it is important that 
Supervisors/Managers fully brief and debrief staff both prior to and following a JII.    
 
Briefing 
 
Supervisors/Managers should share with the selected interviewers the information 
gathered regarding the allegation and should remind interviewers of the interview 
model phases:  
 
•  Introduction: General information about the names and roles of the 
interviewers and how the interview will be recorded. 
•  Rapport Phase and Practice Interview: Remind interviewers of the purpose 
and format of this phase and the need to rehearse the use of open prompts 
•  Interview principles: Remind interviewers to interweave these in the phases 
and to reiterate them throughout the interview as appropriate 
•  Free Narrative: Interviewers should be reminded that this is best evidence as it 
is the uninterrupted account by the child. Open-ended prompts will encourage 
this and interviewers should be reminded to use these e.g. “Tell me about…”; 
“Tell me more about…”; “And then?” 
•  Questioning: Managers should ensure that the interviewers are aware of the 
level of forensic information that may be required in relation to the information 
available about the concern.  
•  Closure: Managers must ensure that interviewers understand the need to carry 
out this phase and that they should:  
¾  Summarise the main evidential points using the child’s language 
where possible; 
¾  Check if the second interviewer has any questions; 
¾  Check if the child has any questions; 
¾  Make the child aware of the possibility of further interviews; 
¾  Provide the child and/or family with contact details for police or 
social work and if appropriate support agencies contact details; 
¾  Thank the child for their time and effort (not for the information 
given) 
¾  Revert to a neutral subject to give the child time to compose 
themselves. 
 
Interviewers should also be reminded: 
  
•  To be aware of the child’s needs during the interview such as breaks if the child 
is tired or needs to use the toilet. 
•  Consent of the child is generally tacit/ assent rather than a formal consent. 
69 

 
 
Following the interview  
 
Following the interview the Supervisor/ Manager must check that the Interviewers: 
  
•  Make sure that the consent form has been signed 
•  Review the visual recording as necessary  
•  Check and agree the manual record- original to be held by police 
•  Provide a copy of the manual record to the social work interviewer 
•  Seal the master copy of the visual recording 
•  Check and label any productions from the interview 
 
Debriefing 
 
The debriefing session undertaken is also an important part of the process of joint 
planning and management of child protection enquiries.  Areas covered should 
include: 
 
•  Findings from the interview- level of risk to this child and /or any other child 
•  Further action to be taken and by whom 
•  Consideration as to whether another interview should be undertaken 
•  Arrangements for a medical examination if required 
•  Identify any practice or operational issues (e.g. training needs; procedural gaps 
•  Record of the debriefing is completed to include decisions taken and copies 
kept by both social work and police services 
70 

 
APPENDIX C:  Benefits of visually recording the interview  
 
There are many benefits of visually recording compared to taking contemporaneous 
verbatim written notes of an interview, many of which the Lord Advocate’s Working 
Group identified (Plotnikoff & Woolfson, 2001 and see also Reid Howie Associates, 
2002 and Richards et al 2007): 
 
•  the recordings increase fairness and transparency for all parties, showing how 
information was obtained;  
•  visual records provide a complete, accurate record of an investigative 
interview, which includes exact words, body language, tone of voice, 
demeanour and non-verbal communication by the interviewer, child and 
anyone else present;  
•  during the interview, the interviewer and second interviewer are freed from 
having to make detailed notes, allowing them to maximise their focus on the 
child and on the gathering of information; 
•  using the technology also offers further possibilities, such as siting the second 
interviewer outside the interview room;  
•  for such reasons, visual recording has the potential to improve the experience 
of the interview for the child and interviewers;  
•  research supports the view that interviewing a child once, as soon after 
disclosure or expression of concerns as possible, is likely to capture the most 
accurate information, so recording the interview improves the quality of 
evidence;   
•  conversely, multiple interviews have been found to have a potentially harmful 
effect on the child and on evidential quality.  Multiple interviews can be a 
significant source of stress for the child and can result in the child’s evidence 
changing over time;   
•  recordings have the potential to reduce the number of times children are 
interviewed; 
•  after being produced in an investigation, recordings can be used in other 
settings to safeguard children, such as in the referral of a case to other social 
work (SW) teams;  
•  recordings can be used by other agencies in the course of legal proceedings.  
They may reduce the level of detail needed in precognitions by the procurator 
fiscal (PF) and may help eliminate the need for precognitions by defence 
agents and by children’s reporters; 
•  the viewing of a child’s evidence and their demeanour by defence agents 
before court proceedings begin has the potential to encourage early pleas; 
•  there is the possibility of using high quality visual recordings as evidence-in-
chief in court and in children’s hearing court proceedings;  
•  visual recordings allow not only an assessment of the reliability and credibility 
of the witness to be made by professionals throughout the justice system, but 
in the case of a recording being shown in court, by the sheriff or judge and 
jury, especially in the new context of courts not being required to conduct 
competency testing; and 
•  recordings are a highly effective tool for investigative interviewers and their 
supervisors to use in reviewing and assessing performance, for consolidation 
of good practice and professional development. 
71 

 
 
Research (e.g. Warren & Woodall, 1999) shows that professional interviewers tend 
to misremember the questions they asked in an interview even when questioned 
immediately after the interview.  This can have serious consequences if an 
interviewer obtained a response from a child as a result of asking a leading or 
misleading question but failed to remember that.   
 
In England and Wales, visual recording has been used for some time and has been 
evaluated.  Research into videotaped children’s evidence has indicated no significant 
difference in the proportion of guilty verdicts from juries viewing videotaped evidence 
as opposed to hearing evidence from the child in person (Davies et al, 1995).   
 
Child witnesses who have given evidence in court in England, Wales and Northern 
Ireland have found having video-recorded statements useful, and they also found it 
helpful, if sometimes distressing, to watch the recording to refresh their memory 
(Hamlyn et al, 2004 and Plotnikoff & Woolfson, 2005).  Although some judicial 
respondents in another evaluation felt a conviction was less likely with recorded 
evidence in chief, no prosecutors claimed lower conviction rates because of using 
video recordings (Burton et al, 2006).   
72 

 
APPENDIX D: Information leaflet on consent 
 
Throughout Scotland, police forces and social work departments who interview 
children together now record these interviews on DVD or store them on secure 
servers.  This provides a better record than writing notes, and the questions asked 
and the child’s reactions are fully recorded as well.  It also means that the 
interviewers can spend more time concentrating on the welfare of the child during 
the interview.  
 
We seek the child’s views on recording before the interview starts.   
 
Using a recording may help to reduce the number of times a child needs to be 
interviewed by other people.  The recording, like any other statement taken by the 
police, may be shown to: 
•  Social workers dealing with the child’s case 
•  The procurator fiscal 
•  The children’s reporter 
•  The defence lawyer and sometimes the accused (under supervised 
circumstances) before the trial 
•  The solicitor for the relevant persons and or children in children’s hearings court 
proceedings 
•  Solicitors representing parties in other related civil court proceedings  
•  The child’s safeguarder 
• Curators 
ad litem appointed by the court to represent the interests of the child or 
an adult relevant person who has a mental disorder and is unable to represent 
himself or herself in the proceedings 
•  A judge or sheriff and a jury, in court 
•  Skilled/Expert witnesses cited by the crown/defence or solicitors on behalf of 
other parties in other non criminal proceedings. 
• Other 
family 
members 
 
Some of these people may not need to speak to the child again because they have 
the recording available instead.   
 
If a child has to go to court to give evidence, the recording could be played as part of 
the evidence but the child may still have to be cross-examined in a criminal trial, 
though not necessarily in a children’s proof or other civil proceeding.  Under the 
Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004, some children may be able to use 
special measures when being cross examined or attending court, including screens 
or TV links.  These may help, if available.   
 
There are very strict rules concerning the safekeeping and copying of recordings.  
They are kept by the police and only the procurator fiscal, children’s reporter, the 
defence
 or the court may use them.  In criminal proceedings the defence (or any 
skilled/expert witnesses) are only allowed to view them at the procurator fiscal’s 
office e.g. in solemn court proceedings.  Solicitors (or any skilled/expert witnesses) 
for the relevant persons or children, the child’s safeguarder, curators ad litem for the 
child or adult relevant persons, can only view the recording at offices of the Scottish 
Children’s Reporter Administration. 
73 

 
ices.


ontact 
 to 
le, 
ou 
ng 
 
olice 
ve 
or an
 p
eop
 p
 if y
iewi

elp
en
__ 
rity to
 h
ung
 watch th
terv
e to gi
__ 
___ 
___
atu
olice serv
be allowed
the Children’s
he law 
 yo
happ
abl
___

d at the end of 
 t
___
___
or m
iew to
____
 and
o be 
____

___
decision please c
le will 
 with
 only 
___
etter at in
 or p
ed
terv
ren
ed t
___
___
rk
eop
___
ate___
ay include 
lv
e in
ild
et b
t of ag
 and carer
___
no
 is complete
is can
___
_D
of p
nvo
 are allowed to
  
resum
ate__
 wo
nts
m
__
 is 
his m
ng ch
 Th
lice g
___
_D
___
ber 
 see th
te)
ild
cial
  T
es. 
ria
 po
___
um
iewi
___
___
 to change your 
ho are i
 
le to
le who
ith ___
ay be p
___
___
___
he ch
eop
terv
 issu
eop
prop
 w
r so
ople, pare
all n
ers and
er m
tial. 
___
___
___
ere t
u wish
pe
 that this for
rk
ntly 
sm
scal, w
nquiry
at in
ning
e p
view
yo
ther p
___
___
___
 wh
 taken place.
 th
ter
Wo
re 
r o
etter 
fiden
y trai
s and ov
___
ian
tu
 safe a 
has
elete as ap
ple 
___
___
iewers o
 in the e
ree,
l fo
cial 
ard
t) 
e fu
ren
get b
 (d
 the in
___
 year
___
___
terv
ved
 ag
 So
 th
ild

nsen
ers 
tify an
ild
 do
eep it con
agree
elp
___
___
 ch
ew that 
ent
he Procurator Fi
 helpfu
rk
 ch
ding of
oung peo
 is 12
o h
e in
___
___
n co
me in
view or subseque
eep
on invol
 you
will k
 t
nd y
cons
t/carers /gu
ti
ntervi
or t
 ow

er, it is
do not 

cial wo
recor
  If
n a
ild who
nship to
m
of th
Information for young 
viewers MUST ensure
pers
elp to iden
iew 

 
e used
aren
 help k
r ow
he
d so
d h
terv
gree/ 
r the 
 b
ldre
nature __
nature __
r p
 
Inter
each inter
 
To
see the i
Reporter 
ot
 
Howev
an
an
agree.
in
I a
 
 fo
 
 to
chi
 
sig
  
(for ch
thei
 
sig
 
relatio
 
(fo
give their
 
If at so
one 
 
 
74 
 

 

 
al 
of
ay 
ere 

orm a
 

visually
of 

t f
s;
fficien
 wh
ession
 view a 
view) 
se 
ance 
ich m
rd
ent
aterially 
pect
of
or 
ild

ter
ore 
rpo
orter. 
orm
in
n as
es no
isfactio
anda
th the 
e of su
e ch
bef
e pu
w) m
 
 the pr
f st
provem
 b
uired to

a recording of a
’s rep
 do
 perf
iews, wh
rvie
. whe
issat
plinary 
 o
rs wi
 to
req
hind this
 o
.g

h as:
ring
f d
terv
ng
ed
m
be
 view 
ildren
disci
 from th
done
 suc
ito
nform
t is 
on
le 
tori
inuous im
ed
ons 
ed after the 
 to
iew for th
e ch
ion, e
arty o
 or in
resu
d
als 
or or pee
sen
g them
 re-
assist professional 
ion, i
e; 
oni
ont
tain
ired
igat
or
ding,
m
nterv
of m
ossib
by th
re. 
em
ation
 seni
d c
 ob
provi
ssion
e i
the reas
su
ecor
ificat
r the 
 an
ore is p
ofe
viewin
requ
ere con

t, or 
accurately, an inte
terested p
n by
n invest
visited 
 the reason to view
n sch
ect of p
 o
ent
 m
 and
o be 
Pr
iewers to 
nter
 qual
 in
sen
 of th
in
 the r
f a
re-
 investig
res,
ake
 Wh
xplain 
pla
ore 
 disclo
ple,
ng
al process 
 an
rt
s or
 
ing
e o
ni
nterv
onal
t. 
d e
rm (t
re i
rd
istratio
edu
fo
o be 
iring
ai
form
of an
 in resp
nde
velopm
r is con
(or m
 from
roc
al com
com
 
ct 
nsen
 - a 
ofessi
 p
 de
ve year
 shoul
n be
requ
or obt
el
 pr
ndu
ation
nsent: 
nsent fo
 No
 f
ocess u
ording 
onal
 or out
ay have t
er 
re, for exam
duct
 tw
petence of i
ive co
wers
e co
 Co
Information for 
hildre
iew. 
vestig
 of
 g
ally required; 
o view a reco
a rec
rpose
om
upport
notification
in
iscon
- a pr
ofessi
rvie
 E:
rt Ord
ent should be sought
r c
 of a crimin
r facilitate a reg
onduct
ion m
pu
, s
of th
al 
 m
ew
 give co
m
IX
nterv
:- 
 of 
ent
t, o
t - a 
rm
vi
f pr
person
rity to
D
 
 o
igat
e i
en
ation
he c
gally required; 
re
ordings whe
 the 
en
ects 
onal
, a 
atu
ecessary t
s t
ive o
nvest
 of
petence evaluation
opm
plain
 asp
ire fo
ssi
ice 
PPEN
ing th
vestig
ere is a Cou
m
ofe
ject
tland
d m
ng, agree
A
 parents
iew wh
it is n
in
the content
affect
the i
th
 part
Com
and technical c
devel
assessm
Co
with
requ
pr
Pract
ob
om
terv
rect
e an
Consent is not leg
fr
record
in
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 
Consent is le
 
to view rec
di
 



 
Child’s ability to
 
In Sco
ag
recordi
appropriate and inte
 

APPENDIX F:  Accommodation and technical specification 
 
Joint investigative interview suites are categorised as A, B and C.  There is a mix of 
suites across the country.  Location and category of suite were determined as a 
result of local consultation.  
 
The following table provides the accommodation standard expected in each 
category along with the level of equipment to be installed in each.  The 
requirements are not prescriptive and may vary between locations.  For example 
some category A suites may not have a dedicated waiting room and in relation to 
technical standards the number of microphones will be dependent on factors such 
as the size and acoustic properties of the room. 
 
All JII suites should comply with disability access requirements and the Equality Act 
2010.  They should also fully enable any investigative interviews with children with 
additional support needs or disabilities.   
 
Category Accommodation 
standard Technical 
standard 

•  Suite will consist of a 
•  Desktop PC with 
dedicated interview 
monitor sited within 
room, monitoring room 
the dedicated 
and waiting room 
monitoring room 
•  There will be a fixed 
•  Wide angled cameras 
digital recorder 
(x2) 
assigned to the suite 
•  Pan, tilt & zoom 
•  These suites will be 
camera (x1) 
dedicated to joint 
• Omni 
directional 
investigative interviews 
microphones (x6) 
•  These suites will give 
•  Covert earpiece and 
the flexibility to have 
transmitter 
one or both interviewers 
• Transcription 
kit 
within the interview 
room 
B 
•  Suite will consist of an 
•  Wide angled cameras 
interview room fitted 
(x2) 
with cameras and 
•  Pan, tilt & zoom 
microphones 
camera (x1) 
•  Typically these suites 
• Omni 
directional 
will be in areas where 
microphones (x6) 
they will not be in 
•  Covert earpiece and 
regular use (or it has not 
transmitter 
been possible to identify   
premises with space for 
a dedicated monitoring 
room) 
•  The digital recorder will 
be provided by one of 
the mobile recorders, 
which will plug into a 
data point within the 
75 

 
room  
•  Both interviewers will be 
within the interview 
room with one 
performing the role of 
second interviewer 
C 
•  These are rooms, which 
•  No equipment will be 
have been pre-identified 
installed in these 
as suitable to set up 
rooms 
mobile equipment  
•  Mobile kit will be set 
•  Rooms will be in quiet 
up within these 
locations to minimise 
rooms. 
disruption to recordings 
by external noise 
•  There will be no 
equipment installed in 
these rooms 
Mobile 
•  Mobile kits provide full 
• Laptop 
digital 
operational flexibility 
recorder 
with the ability to be set 
•  2 cameras (with built 
up in any location 
in microphones) 
• Omni 
directional 
microphone 
•  Robust carry case 
•  Tripod (desktop and 
floor). 
•  Power from single 
socket 
 
76 

 
APPENDIX G:  Restricted Media handling and storage 
 
Discs containing interview material will be given the security classification of 
RESTRICTED in line with the Government Protective Marking Scheme (GPMS).  
 
Restricted classification 
 
The test for classification of RESTRICTED is as follows: Would accidental or 
deliberate compromise of information assets marked RESTRICTED be likely to: 
 
•  Cause substantial distress to an individual;  
•  Prejudice the investigation of / or facilitate the commission of serious crime;  
•  Breach proper undertakings to maintain the confidence of material provided 
by third parties;  
•  Disadvantage government or the police service in commercial or police 
negotiations with others  
•  Undermine the proper management of the public sector and its operations?  
 
If some or all of the above are likely the material will be classified as RESTRICTED. 
 
Data Handling Standards 
 
The following table contains a summary of GPMS requirements relevant to the 
handling of DVD disks.    
 
Actions Restricted 
rules 
Storage 
Protected by one barrier, e.g. a locked container 
within a secure building. 
Disposal 
DVD disks – destroy completely – disintegrate, 
pulverise, melt or shred. 
Movement within 
In a sealed envelope with protective marking 
Police force 
shown. A transit envelope may by used if sealed 
with a security label. 
Movement between 
By post or courier, in a sealed envelope. Do not 
forces / partner 
show protective marking on the envelope. 
agencies. 
Force Data Network/  May be used. 
Criminal Justice 
Extranet 
Internet 
Not to be used without Government approved 
encryption.  
 
 
 
 

 
77 













Scottish 
Court Service
Guidance on Joint investiGative 
interviewinG of child witnesses 
in scotland
© Crown Copyright 2011
iSBN: 978-1-78045-591-4
 
 
APS Group Scotland 
DPPAS12118 (12/11)
w w w . s c o t l a n d . g o v . u k