The Child Abuse Expert
In late January the judge in the Michael Jackson case approved the Prosecutions request to add a child abuse expert to their witness list, despite strenuous opposition from the Defense. Expert witnesses are used to explain or clarify concepts that the courts feels are outside of an average jurors ability to judge based on their own knowledge and experience.
In child sexual abuse case, as in other sexual crimes, the victim often behaves in ways that to someone who has not experienced such abuse may view as odd, suspicious or possibly even incriminating. The expert witness will offer testimony that will hopefully help the jury to understand this behaviour.
What the child abuse expert will be talking about is something called Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, or CAAS. This is a model of victim behaviour developed by Roland C. Summit to explain certain behaviours that are often displayed by children who have been sexually abused.
According to Summit, CAAS contains five levels:
1)Secrecy
2)Helplessness
3)Entrapment and Accomodation
4)Delayed, Conflicting and Reluctant Disclosure
5)Retraction.
Some victims show characteristics from all of these stages, some from none, and the whole range in-between.
It is important to stress that CAAS is not a diagnostic standard—it is not intended to prove that a child has been abused. It is merely a tool to explain why a child may behave in a way that appears to undermine his claim of abuse.
Specific to the Jackson case, it could be used to explain why Gavin denied abuse to his teacher, continued to show affection for Jackson, waited so long to disclose the abuse, did not tell his mother, and/or participated in the rebuttal video.
Despite what the Defense would have us believe, CAAS is an established phenomena that has been used successfully in many court cases. This is not some wild stunt dreamed up by the Prosecution to circumvent Jackson’s due process. The Defense has done an excellent job of implanting the false idea that the accuser’s behaviour can only be explained as a sign of dishonesty, but if an legitimately recognized alternative explanation exists, the jury has a right to hear it.
As mentioned before, CAAS does not prove that the abuse happened. It does not (as the Defense claimed in it’s opposition to the witness) provide a false credibility to bad witness. The use of an expert witness to explain CAAS will result in the Judge charging the jury with something along these lines (These examples are from New Jersey, though I’m sure they are fairly standard whereever CAAS evidence is admissable.)
Charges to the Jury (excerpts)
"
The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome is not a diagnostic device and cannot determine whether or not abuse occurred. It relates only to a pattern of behavior of the victim which may be present in some child sexual abuse cases. You may not consider expert testimony about the Accommodation Syndrome as proving whether abuse occurred or did not occur. Similarly, you may not consider that testimony as proving, in and of itself, that, the alleged victim here, was or was not truthful.""Dr. [A]’s testimony may be considered as explaining certain behavior of the alleged victim of child sexual abuse. As I just stated, that testimony may not be considered as proof that abuse did, or did not, occur. The Accommodation Syndrome, if proven, may help explain why a sexually abused child may [delay reporting and/or recant allegations of abuse and/or deny that any sexual abuse occurred]."
"You may not consider the expert testimony as in any way proving that [defendant] committed, or did not commit, any particular act of abuse. Testimony as to the Accommodation Syndrome is offered only to explain certain behavior of an alleged victim of child sexual abuse."