Loading...
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 632.79 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Esta pesquisa teve como objetivo investigar a percepção dos magistrados acerca do
depoimento testemunhal realizado durante a audiência criminal. A amostra intencional
foi composta por oito (8) magistrados, três (3) do sexo feminino e cinco (5) do sexo
masculino, todos com experiência em inquirição de testemunhas em processos penais. A
recolha de dados foi efetuada através de uma entrevista semiestruturada, construída para
o efeito. Os dados coletados foram submetidos à análise de conteúdo de recorte temático
com base em Bardin (2011). Os resultados desta pesquisa, de natureza qualitativa,
apontaram para uma percepção positiva do depoimento testemunhal (n=8), o qual foi
considerado como fundamental para a tomada da decisão judicial. Conjuntamente com
essa percepção positiva, foi manifestada uma percepção negativa (n=7), no sentido de
que se trata de uma prova frágil e sujeita a falhas. Em relação à forma de
questionamento, os resultados obtidos podem ser agrupados em três subcategorias: a) a
prevalência do mito da objetividade do testemunho (n=5); b) a melhor adequação do
relato livre em comparação com as perguntas fechadas (n=6); e c) a consideração de que
perguntas fechadas afirmativas por presunção são a classe de perguntas mais suscetíveis
à sugestionabilidade do testemunho (n=7). Quanto ao modo de questionamento, os
resultados obtidos podem ser agrupados em duas subcategorias: a) a ordem lógicosequencial
para a formulação de perguntas pelos atores processuais. Metade dos
participantes (n=4) considerou ser mais adequado que o juiz inicie a formulação das
perguntas às testemunhas e a outra metade (n=4) considerou ser mais adequado que as
partes iniciem tal questionamento; b) a ausência do órgão de acusação: predominância
da percepção de que compete ao magistrado suprir essa ausência e realizar as perguntas
às testemunhas (n=5). Em caráter sugestivo, a pesquisa apontou que a constante
qualificação em termos de Psicologia do Testemunho mostra-se como uma importante
ferramenta para a facilitação da tomada da decisão judicial.
This research aimed to investigate the magistrates’ perception about eyewitness testimonies given during criminal court hearings. The intentional sample consisted of eight (8) magistrates, three (3) females and five (5) males, all with experience in the questioning of witnesses in criminal proceedings. The data collection was done through a semi-structured interview, built for this purpose. The collected data were submitted to a thematic content analysis based on Bardin (2011). The results of this research, which are qualitative, pointed to a positive perception of eyewitness testimony (n=8), which is considered essential to the court decision. Together with this positive perception, a negative perception (n=7) was expressed, in the sense that it is seen as fragile and subject to flaws. Regarding the form of questioning, the results obtained can be grouped into three subcategories: a) the prevalence of the myth of the objectivity of the testimony (n=5); b) a better adequacy of free report compared to closed questions (n= 6); and c) the consideration that closed questions supposed to be affirmative are the class of questions most susceptible to the suggestibility of the testimony (n=7). As to the way of questioning, the results obtained can be grouped into two subcategories: a) the logical and sequential order to the formulation of questions by the procedural actors. Half of the participants (n=4) considered to be more appropriate for the judge to start questioning the witnesses, while the other half (n= 4) considered to be more appropriate for the parties to initiate such questioning; b) the absence of the prosecution body. Predominance of the perception that it is up to the magistrate to make up for this absence and to question the witnesses (n=5). In a suggestive way, the research pointed out that the constant qualification in terms of Psychology of Eyewitness Testimony is an important tool for facilitating judicial decision-making.
This research aimed to investigate the magistrates’ perception about eyewitness testimonies given during criminal court hearings. The intentional sample consisted of eight (8) magistrates, three (3) females and five (5) males, all with experience in the questioning of witnesses in criminal proceedings. The data collection was done through a semi-structured interview, built for this purpose. The collected data were submitted to a thematic content analysis based on Bardin (2011). The results of this research, which are qualitative, pointed to a positive perception of eyewitness testimony (n=8), which is considered essential to the court decision. Together with this positive perception, a negative perception (n=7) was expressed, in the sense that it is seen as fragile and subject to flaws. Regarding the form of questioning, the results obtained can be grouped into three subcategories: a) the prevalence of the myth of the objectivity of the testimony (n=5); b) a better adequacy of free report compared to closed questions (n= 6); and c) the consideration that closed questions supposed to be affirmative are the class of questions most susceptible to the suggestibility of the testimony (n=7). As to the way of questioning, the results obtained can be grouped into two subcategories: a) the logical and sequential order to the formulation of questions by the procedural actors. Half of the participants (n=4) considered to be more appropriate for the judge to start questioning the witnesses, while the other half (n= 4) considered to be more appropriate for the parties to initiate such questioning; b) the absence of the prosecution body. Predominance of the perception that it is up to the magistrate to make up for this absence and to question the witnesses (n=5). In a suggestive way, the research pointed out that the constant qualification in terms of Psychology of Eyewitness Testimony is an important tool for facilitating judicial decision-making.
Description
Relatório apresentado à Universidade Fernando Pessoa como parte dos requisitos para o cumprimento do programa de Pós-Doutoramento em Psicologia Forense e do Testemunho
Keywords
Testemunha Audiência criminal Magistrados Witness Criminal court hearing Magistrates