CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...The Child Witness
......Competency
.........Minor Found Competent
 25 Cards On This Topic:
  • Although 7-yr.-old's testimony suggested many reasons to seriously doubt his understanding or recollection, district judge correctly found those considerations affected the weight of his testimony rather than his competence.
  • 5-year-old competent; no need to threaten punishment for failure to tell truth; failure to recall all details or to testify without inconsistencies are issues relating to credibility, not competency.
  • No distinction made between competence of young children and that of other witnesses.
  • 5-yr.-old witness's "fantastical" statements, though troubling, ultimately bore on her credibility, not her competency, and were not sufficient to disturb trial court's ruling finding her competent.
  • Juvenile court's decision to accept evidence of 3-yr.-old's statement of sexual abuse by F—in caseworker's report and video of C—was supported by substantial evidence and the proper basis for dependency jurisdiction.
  • No abuse of discretion in finding that 11-yr.-old abuse victim with moderate mental disabilities was competent to testify and a credible witness.
  • As mother did not show hers was the ••only•• reasonable view, Court deferred to trial ct.'s holding that 9-yr.-old was of sufficient age and maturity under Hague exception for his views against returning to Chile to be considered.
  • As no evidence of procedures which would trigger need for a taint hearing re competency, and processes existed to challenge minor V via cross-exam, counsel's conduct not unreasonable under prevailing professional norms.
  • D's due process rights not violated because victim, his teenaged daughter, failed to give specific details re time and circumstances of each rape count for which he was charged.
  • Though C's testimony re abuse by F inconsistent, essence of offense did not change with retelling and court had further opportunity to assess C's demeanor and that of parents.
  • Although it took C months of therapy before prior sexual acts of F become known, such belated revelation understandable and not inherently incredible.
  • Inconsistencies and conflicts in sexual assault V's testimony resolved by trial court; testimony reasonably supported court's findings D had forcible intercourse with V on certain date.
  • Corroboration of child abuse victim’s testimony not required.
  • Approved manner of challenging credibility of young witnesses.
  • Child victim’s failure to specify precise date, time or circumstance did not render "generic testimony" legally insufficient to support conviction.
  • Testimony of very young witnesses may be credible.
  • Specific molestation dates not required by child victim to support conviction of incest.
  • Inconsistencies in testimony don't render child incompetent. Child competent unless incapable of expressing self to be understood or cannot understand duty to tell truth.
  • Inconsistencies in testimony and possibility that foster parents made suggestions did not make child incompetent.
  • Minor competent to testify re sexual abuse despite stress-induced hallucinations manifested on cross-exam.
  • Determination of child’s competency relies on not only words spoken, but also demeanor. Determination upheld if supported by substantial evidence.
  • Burden of establishing incompetency is on person objecting to testimony.
  • Objections to competency of minor witness must be made to trial court; minor competent despite inconsistencies and possible coaching.
  • Young child may be competent even if cannot remember some simple facts. Subsequently given testimony, may be used to support ruling on qualifications.
  • Minors found competent to testify.


    •