HMA v KB [2022] ScotHC HCJ_4 (30 October 2020)

HMA v KB [2022] ScotHC HCJ_4 (30 October 2020)

Professor MacPherson is sufficiently qualified to give expert evidence on childhood memory and delayed disclosure of child sexual abuse due to his experience as a forensic clinical psychologist. The expert evidence is necessary in this exceptional case due to the complainer's very young age at the time of alleged abuse, the detailed nature of her memories, the delayed disclosure, and the manner of recollection (flashbacks). However, passages in the report relating to 'emerging research' on memory trace, the effect of survivor groups, and 'false memory syndrome' are inadmissible due to lack of reliable scientific foundation.

Citation
[2022] ScotHC HCJ_4
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty's Advocate; Accused: KB
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Issue Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Objection sustained in part and rejected in part.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Child Sexual Abuse, Memory Evidence, Expert Qualification, Necessity of Expert Evidence, Reliability of Expert Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence Law Admissibility of Expert Evidence Child Sexual Abuse Memory Evidence Expert Qualification Necessity of Expert Evidence Reliability of Expert Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Prosecution

KB

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Issue Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Professor MacPherson is qualified to give expert evidence on childhood memory and delayed disclosure of child sexual abuse
  2. 2 Whether the expert evidence is necessary for the jury's understanding
  3. 3 Whether certain passages of the expert report are reliable and admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Professor MacPherson is sufficiently qualified to give expert evidence on childhood memory and delayed disclosure of child sexual abuse due to his experience as a forensic clinical psychologist. The expert evidence is necessary in this exceptional case due to the complainer's very young age at the time of alleged abuse, the detailed nature of her memories, the delayed disclosure, and the manner of recollection (flashbacks). However, passages in the report relating to 'emerging research' on memory trace, the effect of survivor groups, and 'false memory syndrome' are inadmissible due to lack of reliable scientific foundation.

Court Disposition

Objection sustained in part and rejected in part.

Orders

  • Passages in Professor MacPherson's report relating to emerging research on memory trace, survivor group influence, and false memory syndrome must be redacted and not referenced at trial.
  • The remainder of Professor MacPherson's report is admissible and he may be called as an expert witness at trial.