Suchergebnisse

BackgroundSeveral jurisdictions mandate the presence of an independent support person during police interviews with vulnerable people. The current study investigated police officers' experiences and perceptions of these volunteers during interviews with people with intellectual disability(ies) (ID).MethodsThe sample comprised 229 police officers who attended a mandatory firearms training course in Melbourne, Australia, in 2010.ResultsParticipants commonly reported utilizing independent support persons and displayed a fair understanding of their role. Overall, volunteers were engaged more frequently than family/friends; police considered the volunteers to be more impartial during interviews, whereas family/friends provided a greater level of emotional support to interviewees.ConclusionsIndependent support persons need to demonstrate two quite different types of support to people with intellectual disability(ies) during police interviews; these require quite different skill sets and suggest the need for more tailored training and support for these volunteers. Implications for future research and policy are discussed.

Abstract
Purpose
There is a lack of research examining age-related differences in the characteristics of young people who use family violence between key developmental periods. This study provides a population-based descriptive overview of young people who come to police attention for using family violence and examines how characteristics differ across early adolescence (10–14 years), late adolescence (15–19 years) and young adulthood (20–24 years).

Method
The sample comprised all youth aged 10–24 years (N = 5014) who were reported to police for using family violence over a four-month period in 2019. Chi-square analyses with odds ratios as a measure of effect size were used to examine age-related differences in sociodemographic, psychosocial, and family violence-related characteristics across the three age groups. A Kaplan Meier survival curve was used to examine age-based differences in time to family violence recidivism.

Results
Findings suggested that young people who used family violence were typically male, disproportionately from low socioeconomic backgrounds, and a significant minority experienced mental health issues. Substance abuse and unemployment/school truancy were higher among those in late adolescence and young adulthood, while accessibility needs, and childhood victimisation were highest among those in early adolescence. Child-to-parent abuse was highest among those in early- and late-adolescence, while intimate partner abuse was highest among those in young adulthood. There was no significant difference in time to family violence recidivism among the groups.

Conclusion
The findings of this study highlight the variation in characteristics of youth family violence according to three key developmental periods. Such information may be used to inform assessment and intervention approaches for this cohort.

ObjectiveOver the past five decades, numerous researchers in common‐law jurisdictions have reported that jurors often fail to understand and apply the law presented to them by the trial judge. Several researchers have attempted to improve understanding of the law through revising language and utilizing instructional aides. The present study examines a novel method of instructing the jury, known as the "fact‐based" approach, which embeds legal concepts in a series of logically ordered written factual questions that the jury must answer to reach a verdict.MethodsThe study compared 287 jurors in 45 trials who received "fact‐based" instructions in New Zealand against 176 jurors in 41 trials who received standard form instructions in Australia. Participants in the study were compared on their ability to perform three tasks—selecting legal concepts in a recognition task, paraphrasing concepts in a recall task, and applying legal concepts to legally unambiguous factual scenarios.ResultsAfter controlling for trial‐related factors such as length of trial, word count, and readability of instructions, as well as the self‐reported level of education of participants, the study found that jurors receiving fact‐based directions performed significantly better on application‐based tasks but not significantly different on recall or recognition tasks.ConclusionThe findings suggest that fact‐based instructions may have utility for enhancing the jury's ability to resolve questions of fact in accordance with the law.