The multifaceted perspectives on the experience of statement validity assessment in cases of sexualized violence-A qualitative focus group study

Statement validity assessment (SVA) plays an important role in criminal and social legal proceedings in connection with offences against sexual self-determination. Being subjected to a credibility assessment can be experienced as stressful and aggravating. The aim of this study was to describe and examine different professional and subjective perspectives on the experience of credibility assessment in the context of dealing with experiences of sexualized violence. For this purpose, three focus groups were conducted with experts from different interdisciplinary and personal backgrounds (n = 12). The qualitative content analysis indicates that persons with different professional and personal backgrounds identify various hurdles for survivors of sexualized violence in the context of criminal and social legal proceedings and in connection with credibility assessment proceedings. In addition to the inherently critical and inquiring character of a SVA, participants described the recollection of past experiences from long ago as challenging for individuals. In addition, focus group participants named factors related to criminal procedures, such as the length of the proceedings and insufficient information on individual procedural processes as an obstacle to dealing with experiences of sexualized violence. To reduce avoidable burdens for survivors of sexualized violence, participating experts advocated for a systematic professionalization of the judiciary through training and further education of judges, police officers and lawyers, an improvement in interviewing witnesses and documenting statements and the use of more neutral terms in connection with credibility assessments. The implications for the practice and future research are discussed.