Browsing by Author "Bulathsinhala, B.A.A.R."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Justice delayed-justice denied: a study on time intervals of medico-legal examinations, reporting and giving evidence in cases of alleged child abuse victims
(College of Forensic Pathologists of Sri Lanka, 2011) Edirisinghe, P.A.S.; Kitulwatte, I.D.G.; Shihanada, A.A.S.; Bulathsinhala, B.A.A.R.
INTRODUCTION: A medico-legal examination is an important step in the legal system where initiation of giving justice to the victim begins. Giving 'Justice' is a process where many stake holders are involved. An undue delay in the system is considered as justice denied as well as draining of the value of the judgment. OBJECTIVE: to find out the time frames of the medico-legal examinations, reporting, and giving oral evidence in a court of law and recommend measures to improve the existing system. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective descriptive study was conducted based on case records maintained by first and second authors for past ten years. The information was gathered on a proforma to fulfill the objectives. The data was analyzed using version 16 of SPSS statistical package. RESULTS: Out of 110 cases studied 78% of cases were on alleged sexual abuse. 52% belonged to the adolescent age group (12-18). 74% of cases were seen within 24hours of issue of MLEF but 5.5 % were seen after 7 days. 56(51%) cases examined did not receive summons/request from a relevant authority indicating that either the cases were settled with the police or no further investigations carried out. Response to summons/request for MLR was good (80% were sent within 3 months). Mean time taken to summon/request a report by the relevant authority was 17 months, while mean time to receive a summons from the High Court was 50.6 months (4.2 years). The mean time taken to give medical evidence was 62.5 months (5.2 years) from the day of the examination. CONCLUSION: There was no delay in initiation of medico-legal examination. Responding to summons was satisfactory. However, the mean period of 1.4 years in requesting the report and period of 5 years in high court proceedings need serious considerations.
Remarks documented on medico-legal examination forms on sexual abuse cases; are they properly comprehended by the police?
(College of Forensic Pathologists of Sri Lanka, 2013) Kitulwatte, I.D.G.; Rajapaksha, W.R.A.S.; Edirisinghe, P.A.S.; Perera, W.N.S.; Wijerathne, N.A.S.P.; Sihanada, A.A.S.; Bulathsinhala, B.A.A.R.; Gunathilake, R.
INTRODUCTION: Expert medical evidence is widely used in sexual abuse cases, but its contribution to the progress of legal cases is unclear. Poor understanding of the remarks given by the medical officers in a Medico Legal Examination Form (MLEF) in alleged sexual abuse cases by the police officers may affect effective administration of justice. OBJECTIVE: This study is mainly aimed at assessing the degree of understanding by the police officers’ when reading three commonly expressed medico-legal remarks in cases of alleged sexual abuse. Secondly, to identify the areas of poor understanding, for which interventions need to be carried out. STUDY DESIGN: Cross sectional descriptive study was conducted among 64 police officers, in the rank of police constables and sergeants from western province, who are attending to routine work of a police station (criminal investigations, children and women’s desk and traffic unit). Data collection was done by self administered questionnaire after a briefing regarding the study and instructions on how to fill the questionnaire. RESULTS: 72% of the officers believed that they understood the statements written on Medico-Legal Examination Form (MLEF) when it is in native language while only 32% believed so for statements in English. However the analysis of the correct responses revealed that only 28.9% of officers understood the exact meaning in native language while it was 10.4% for English. The understanding about the statement on absence of medical evidence to confirm or exclude the allegation when given in Sinhala was 26.6% while it was 10.9% in English. The statement on evidence of vaginal penetration has been correctly understood by 20.3% in Sinhala while it is 7.8 % in English. CONCLUSION: Statements made in native language are approximately three times better understood than the ones made in English. However, overall understanding of the remarks made by doctors was very poor. It is high time we take necessary actions to intervene if our goal is effective administration of justice.