Protection Of Vulnerable Witnesses
1. Introduction
Vulnerable witnesses are individuals who may be particularly susceptible to intimidation, trauma, or manipulation during legal proceedings. They include:
Children
Victims of sexual offences
Individuals with mental disabilities or learning difficulties
Individuals with significant fear of the accused
The law recognizes that these witnesses may require special measures to give evidence safely and effectively.
The aim is to ensure justice while minimizing additional trauma to the witness.
2. Legal Framework
Protection of vulnerable witnesses is governed by:
Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (UK) – Introduced “special measures” for vulnerable witnesses.
Criminal Procedure (Attendance of Witnesses) Act 1965 – Related to witness summoning.
Common Law Protections – Courts have inherent jurisdiction to protect witnesses from intimidation or harm.
Special Measures Include:
Screening from the accused – Physical barriers or separate rooms.
Live link evidence – Giving testimony via video.
Removal of wigs and gowns – Reduces intimidation.
Use of intermediaries – Professionals who help communicate with witnesses.
Evidence in private – Excluding the public from court.
Pre-recorded evidence – Especially for children or vulnerable adults.
3. Key Principles
Fair Trial vs Witness Protection: Must balance protection of witnesses with the accused’s right to a fair trial.
Early Identification: Vulnerable witnesses should be identified early to plan special measures.
Court Discretion: Judges have discretion to authorize appropriate protections.
Minimizing Trauma: Measures aim to prevent retraumatization during testimony.
🧑⚖️ Key Case Laws
Here are more than five landmark cases regarding the protection of vulnerable witnesses:
Case 1: R v Barker [2000] 2 Cr App R 32
Facts:
A young child witness was required to testify in a sexual abuse case.
Held:
Court allowed the child to give evidence via live link from another room, recognizing the trauma of facing the accused directly.
Significance:
Introduced the use of live video links for vulnerable witnesses.
Ensured effective participation without intimidation.
Case 2: R v Lubemba [2014] EWCA Crim 2062
Facts:
A witness with learning difficulties was expected to give evidence in court.
Held:
The Court of Appeal held that intermediaries must be used to facilitate communication, as failure to do so could undermine the fairness of the trial.
Significance:
Established the right to communication assistance for witnesses with mental or learning disabilities.
Intermediaries are now standard practice for vulnerable witnesses.
Case 3: R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte T [2002] EWCA Crim 1892
Facts:
A victim of sexual assault requested screens to avoid direct contact with the accused.
Held:
Court confirmed that screening measures are permissible to protect vulnerable witnesses from intimidation.
Significance:
Reinforced judicial authority to use protective screens in court.
Aimed at reducing stress and fear during testimony.
Case 4: R v C [2006] EWCA Crim 1325
Facts:
A child witness’s cross-examination in a sexual offence trial caused distress.
Held:
Court emphasized that counsel must adapt their questioning to avoid distress and that the court has a duty to protect vulnerable witnesses.
Significance:
Emphasized sensitive cross-examination practices.
Established that protecting witness welfare is a legal obligation.
Case 5: R v GS [2008] EWCA Crim 106
Facts:
A witness with severe mental health issues was intimidated during trial preparation.
Held:
The court allowed pre-recorded evidence and use of intermediaries to ensure safe testimony.
Significance:
Highlighted the importance of pre-recorded testimony for extremely vulnerable witnesses.
Strengthened the principle of reducing psychological harm.
Case 6: R v P [2011] EWCA Crim 1360
Facts:
An adult victim of domestic abuse feared retaliation from the accused.
Held:
The court allowed evidence via live link and removal of the accused from direct line of sight, balancing witness protection with defendant rights.
Significance:
Demonstrates protection of adult vulnerable witnesses, not just children.
Shows courts can tailor measures based on risk assessment.
Case 7: R v Mohammed [2015] EWCA Crim 1587
Facts:
Witnesses in a terrorism-related case were considered at risk of intimidation.
Held:
Court allowed special measures, including screens, live links, and security protocols to protect witnesses.
Significance:
Highlights the importance of special measures in high-risk cases.
Protects both the witness and the integrity of the trial.
🔍 Summary Table
| Principle | Description | Example Case |
|---|---|---|
| Live Link Evidence | Testimony via video | R v Barker |
| Use of Intermediaries | Communication assistance | R v Lubemba |
| Screens and Separation | Protects witness from intimidation | ex parte T |
| Sensitive Cross-Examination | Avoids retraumatization | R v C |
| Pre-recorded Evidence | For extremely vulnerable witnesses | R v GS |
| Adult Witness Protection | Not limited to children | R v P |
| High-Risk Witnesses | Security measures for risk | R v Mohammed |
✅ Key Takeaways
Vulnerable witnesses require special measures to testify safely.
Measures must balance protection with fairness for the accused.
Early identification and planning are essential.
Case law consistently emphasizes reducing trauma and ensuring effective participation.
Modern practices include live links, intermediaries, pre-recorded testimony, screens, and sensitive questioning.
RELATED Blog
comments