Skip to main content
The Supreme Court, Hearsay, and CRAWFORD: Implications for Child Interviewers
University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series
  • Thomas D. Lyon, University of Southern California
20 APSAC (American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children) Advisor 2 (2008). This paper can be downloaded at
The purpose of this article is to explain the implications of Crawford for child interviewing. The bottom line is that interviewers should remain committed to best practice; that is, they should continue to pursue approaches that increase the accuracy and completeness of children's reports. It would be a mistake, for example, to stop videotaping interviews in the hopes that this would render interviews non-testimonial. As for prosecutors, Crawford suggests that greater efforts should be made to enable children to testify at trial. In this article, I will briefly review the research on best practices in interviewing, discuss Crawford and the limits it places on testimonial hearsay, and explain how interviewers and prosecutors should best respond.
Date of this Version
Citation Information
Thomas D. Lyon. "The Supreme Court, Hearsay, and CRAWFORD: Implications for Child Interviewers" (2009)
Available at: