Child Sex Abuse Case Heard at High Court

By Lee Ross
Published March 01, 2011
FoxNews.com

In a disjointed hour of arguments before the Supreme Court, the justices bogged down over some basic legal matters preventing them from having a more thorough discussion about the procedures police officers must follow before interviewing a child who may be a victim of sexual abuse.

While cases often come to the high court with various procedural irregularities, this one in particular seemed to frustrate many of the justices and may ultimately lead to a resolution that doesn't address the serious constitutional question presented.

As a result, the court could leave for another case to decide whether a law enforcement officer must obtain a warrant, court order or parental consent before conducting a schoolhouse interview with a minor. FULL STORY

Wexler left an excellent comment there-

The rules imposed by the 9th circuit already are law in much of the country - the second circuit, for example, (New York, Connecticut, Vermont) imposed the same conditions more than a decade ago, and there is no evidence that children are any less safe in those states.

But children there do have more protection from being treated like the nine-year-old girl in this case, badgered for two hours about the most intimate aspects of her life by a male caseworker, while an armed, male sheriff's deputy looked on. She was so traumatized that she became physically ill.

The 9th circuit said only that before barging in and questioning a child the caseworker and law enforcement should have either the parent's permission - and 90 percent of the time when they ask for such permission they get it, OR permission from a judge. And if it's really an emergency and there's no time to get permission from a judge, the workers remain free to question the child entirely on their own authority.

But Oregon claimed that wasn't enough. They are demanding the right to traumatize children this way based on no more than, and these are literally their own words from their brief, "speculation and hearsay."

So it's no wonder that among the 70 groups and individuals that signed onto amicus briefs supporting the family, several are groups that represent *children* in abuse and neglect cases. Other groups range from the Family Research Council to the Southern Poverty Law Center - yes, they're on the same side on this one.

There's much more on the website my group created about the case, www.camretavgreene.info (My group's volunteer vice president represented the family, pro bono, in this case.)

Richard Wexler
Executive Director
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform
www.nccpr.org