Blog

Ohio v. Clark: Protecting Children Against Childhood Sexual Abuse

 

Capture

Published in conjunction as a chapter in the American Bar Association’s State of Criminal Justice 2017 Book,  NCCASP’s chapter (chapter 15) explores how the U.S. Supreme Court  Case of Ohio v. Clark can swing the pendulum back towards justice for victims of childhood sexual abuse.

Download Here 

“In the least, Ohio v. Clark overrules the reasoning in Bordeaux and the similar line of cases where the statements of a very young child was found to have been testimonial statements. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to address the question of whether statements made by young children during forensic interviews are testimonial, the reasoning in Clark was similar to Arroyo and suggests such statements may be nontestimonial.”

Entire Volume Available Here

 

Necessity to Address Child Torture Report

REPORT PICTURE

Upcoming October 2017 (The draft was published to the field in August 2017, NCCASP is incorporating commentary received). 

If a child survives the worst forms of child abuse (Child Torture) many state laws do not adequately address the level of severity inhumanity the child has faced.

Based on the compiled sample cases, the physicians defined child torture in the medical context as: (1) the perpetrator subjecting the child to at least two physical assaults… which would cause prolonged physical pain, emotional distress, bodily injury or death, AND (2) at least two elements of psychological abuse such as isolation, intimidation, emotional/physical maltreatment terrorizing, spurning, or deprivation inflicted by the child’s caretaker.[1]

Physical assaults commonly manifest themselves as: hitting or kicking the child,  causing the child to impact objects, beating the child with objects, tying, binding, or gagging the child, stabbing or cutting the child, burning the child, breaking the child’s bones, exposing the child  to prolonged environmental heat or cold, forcing the child to exercise for extended periods of time, forcefully restraining the child or forcing the child to maintain an uncomfortable position for extended periods of time, forcing the child to  ingest noxious fluids, dangerous materials or excrement, sexually assaulting the child, and  intentionally aggravating the child’s pain of prior injuries.[2]

Continue reading “Necessity to Address Child Torture Report”