About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

27 Campbell L. Rev. 279 (2004-2005)
Child Sex Abuse Victims: How Will Their Stories Be Heard after Crawford v. Washington

handle is hein.journals/camplr27 and id is 285 raw text is: CHILD SEX ABUSE VICTIMS: HOW WILL THEIR STORIES BE HEARD AFTER CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON? INTRODUCTION Christa Nester, a state prosecutor and child advocate, is working with seventeen-year-old Alice, who has been sexually abused by her father for approximately ten years. Alice is very fearful of testifying face-to-face against her father. Ms. Nester has videotaped interviews with Alice, the social worker, and other prosecutors where Alice explic- itly describes the abuse. Since Alice's allegation, five other identified victims have refused to testify, including Alice's older sister Bonnie. Pursuant to a recent United States Supreme Court decision, Crawford v. Washington, Ms. Nester is unable to admit these videotapes or the testimony of the social worker, regardless of a judicial determination of reliability. This case, decided in March 2004, purported to protect the defendant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation and declared that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible unless the victim is unavaila- ble and there was prior opportunity for the defendant to cross-examine the witness.1 Ms. Nester and other prosecutors now face the difficult task of advocating for child victims after this decision. This comment focuses on the Confrontation Clause's interpreta- tion throughout history and demonstrates the adverse effects the cur- rent state of the law has on child sex abuse victims like Alice and Bonnie. As such, the United States Supreme Court should declare that current statutory protections for child sex abuse victims are valid exceptions to the Confrontation Clause. Additionally, states should be encouraged to establish these statutes where they do not exist. BACKGROUND Historical Underpinnings of the Confrontation Clause The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment guarantees the defendant the right to confront his accuser face-to-face at trial.2 The origin of the Sixth Amendment dates back to the age of the Roman 1. See Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). 2. U.S. CONST. amend. VI (In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process 279

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most