This analysis of the use of hearsay testimony in child sexual abuse cases focuses on State laws enacted to respond to the problems involved in admitting this testimony and the impact of the United States Supreme Court's decision in Idaho v. Wright.
Prosecutors have successfully used certain exceptions to the hearsay rule in these cases, but often find that a child's statements do not satisfy these exceptions. As a result, several State legislatures have adopted a specific hearsay exception for out-of-court statements made by sexually-abused children. However, the Supreme court held that the trustworthiness of such statements must be established by looking only to the circumstances surrounding the making of the statement and not to any additional corroborating evidence. This rule can severely hamper the use of hearsay testimony in child sexual abuse cases. If lower courts become more lenient when assessing the surrounding circumstances, the Supreme Court may be forced to reassess its decision. In addition, State legislatures must rethink their laws in view of the Supreme court decisions. Finally, prosecutors will have to change their methods to address the heavy presumption of unreliability for out-of-court statements, establishing procedural safeguards such as videotaping the interviews with the child. Footnotes