Abstract

This study analyzed the use of expert reports in the investigations and trials of cases of sexual violence against people with intellectual disabilities. A total of 670 alleged sexual assault cases against victims with intellectual disabilities were analyzed. Results showed that 97.5% of the cases included at least one expert report. In most cases(91%), the expert reports of statement validity assessment were included. Additionally, doctor’s note (41.1%) from obstetricians and Psychiatrists, intermediary reports(36%), and expert witnesses(psychologists’) reports (9.5%) were included. In 80 cases (44.4%) of the 180 cases in which a victim’ statement credibility was in question during the trial, judges cited the expert’s reports of statement validity assessment as the basis for the judgment on the reliability of the victims’ accusation. The frequency of citing the report was higher when the victim was under the age of 13, or when the defendant was found guilty. Regrading the report content, the evaluations of criteria-based content analysis(CBCA) was most frequently cited, while the victim’s psychological status, cognitive limitation, as well as possibile contamination of victim’s account, were also mentioned in the ruling statements. Results showed agreement between experts’ statement validity assessments and judges’ determinations in 79 cases out of the 80 cases Finally, this study discussed ways to utilize expert options.