![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |
England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions >> V v I (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 717 (Fam) (26 March 2025) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2025/717.html Cite as: [2025] EWHC 717 (Fam) |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
FAMILY DIVISION
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
V |
Applicant |
|
- and - |
||
I |
Respondent |
____________________
Geraldine More O'Ferrall (instructed by Osbornes Law) for the Respondent
Hearing dates: 6th, 7th, 12th, 13th March 2025
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Mrs Justice Judd :
The allegations
The hearing
The law
"[104] Any judge who has had to conduct a fact-finding hearing such as this is likely to have had experience of a witness – as here a woman deposing to serious domestic violence and grave sexual abuse - whose evidence, although shot through with unreliability as to details, with gross exaggeration and even with lies, is nonetheless compelling and convincing as to the central core. It is trite that there are all kinds of reasons why witnesses lie, but where the issues relate, as here, to failed marital relationships and the strong emotions and passions that the court process itself releases and brings into prominence in such a case, the reasons why someone in the mother's position may lie, even lie repeatedly, are more than usually difficult to decipher. Yet through all the lies, as experience teaches, one may nonetheless be left with a powerful conviction that on the essentials the witness is telling the truth, perhaps because of the way in which she gives her evidence, perhaps because of a number of small points which, although trivial in themselves, nonetheless suddenly illuminate the underlying realities."
"in cases where repeated accounts are given of events…, the court must think carefully about the significance or otherwise of any reported discrepancies. They may arise for a number of reasons. One possibility is of course that they are lies designed to hide culpability. Another is that they are lies told for other reasons. Further possibilities include faulty recollection or confusion at times of stress or when the importance of accuracy is not fully appreciated, or there may be inaccuracy or mistake in the record-keeping or recollection of the person hearing and relaying the account. The possible effects of delay and repeated questioning upon memory should also be considered, as should the effect on one person of hearing accounts given by others. As memory fades, a desire to iron out wrinkles may not be unnatural – a process that might inelegantly be described as "story-creep" may occur without any necessary inference of bad faith". These words echo the words of Leggatt J in Gestmin SGPS v Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 3560 as to the fallibility of human recollection, and the limitations of memory".
"It is desirable that interviews with young children should be conducted as soon as possible after any allegations are made (Re M (Minors)(Sexual Abuse: Evidence) [1993] 1 FLR 822)."
MacDonald J made a number of similar points in Re P (Sexual Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearing) [2019] EWFC 27. Where a child has been interviewed on a number of occasions the court may attach diminishing weight to what is said in the later interviews (Re D (Child Abuse: Interviews) [1998] 2 FLR 10). The court will wish to see responses from the child which are neither forced nor led (Re X (A Minor)(Child Abuse: Evidence) [1989] 1 FLR 30). It is normally undesirable for a parent to be present during an interview with the child (Re N (Child Abuse: Evidence) [1996] 2 FLR 214) and see the Cleveland Report (para 12.35). In Re S (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 1254, Ryder LJ confirmed that the guidance set out in the Cleveland Report at paragraph 12.34 with respect to interviewing children remain good practice.
The mother's evidence
The children's evidence to third parties
The father's evidence
Analysis
Conclusions