logo czasopisma

Articles

Vol. 56 No. 3 (2025): Prawo i Więź nr 3 (56) 2025

A Hearing Conducted in the Presence of a Facility Dog in Criminal Proceedings: An Effective Means of Supporting Vulnerable Victimsand Witnesses or a Threat to the Interests of the Accused and the Well-Being of the Dog?

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI56.1282
Submitted
3 April 2025
Published
8 July 2025

Abstract

For decades, national, international, and supranational legislators have shown interest in fighting for the rights of victims and witnesses in criminal proceedings, as reflected in numerous legal acts. Nevertheless, the need to find solutions that duly protect the interests of victims and witnesses while upholding the defendant's right to a fair trial remains relevant. For this reason, this article examines hearings conducted with the assistance of a facility dog as a means of supporting vulnerable victims and witnesses. This method, which is not part of the Polish criminal process, has been used for many years in other countries, particularly in the USA. Given this context, it was deemed advisable to conduct a detailed analysis and assess whether its inclusion in Polish criminal proceedings would be justified.

References

  1. Adamska-Gallant Anna, „Vulnerable Witnesses in Practice of International Courts – Definition and Trauma as the Key Risk Factor” Peace Human Rights Governance, nr 1 (2024): 53-74. https://doi:10.14658/PUPJ-PHRG-2024-aof-5.
  2. Albuquerque Natalia, Guo Kun, Wilkinson Anna Savalli, Carine Otta, Emma, Mills Daniel, „Dogs recognize dog and human emotions” Biology Letters, nr 1 (2016): 1-5.
  3. Bieńkowska Ewa, Lidia Mazowiecka, „Zagadnienia wstępne: o genezie, istocie i znaczeniu Konwencji”, [w:] Konwencja o zapobieganiu i zwalczaniu przemocy wobec kobiet i przemocy domowej. Komentarz, red. Ewa Bieńkowska, Lidia Mazowiecka. 13-24. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2024.
  4. Coren Stanley, „How Therapy Dogs Almost Never Came to Exist” Psychology Today, 11 marca 2013. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/canine-corner/201302/how-therapy-dogs-almost-never-came-exist.
  5. Dempster Tammy, Liz Spruin, Katarina Mozova, „Facility dogs in UK courtrooms: Public perspective” Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, nr 3 (2024): 314- 337. https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2022.2133662.
  6. Diard Pascale Robert, „In French courthouses, dogs contribute to a more humane justice system” Le Monde, 8 marca 2025. https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2025/03/08/in-french-courthouses-dogs-contribute-to-a-more-humane-justice-system_6738956_7.html.
  7. Doak Jonathan, „Victims’ Rights in Criminal Trials: Prospects for Participation” Journal of Law and Society, nr 2 (2005): 294-316.
  8. Ensminger John J., Sherri Minhinnick, James Lawrence Thomas, Itiel E. Dror, „The Use and Abuse of Dogs in the Witness Box” Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy, nr 1(2020): 1-65.
  9. Ernst Lorraine, „Animal-Assisted Therapy: An Exploration of Its History, Healing Benefits, and How Skilled Nursing Facilities Can Set Up Programs” Annals of Long-Term Care: Clinical Care and Aging (2014): 27-31. https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/altc/articles/animal-assisted-therapy-exploration-
  10. -its-history-healing-benefits-and-how-skilled-nursing.
  11. Fine Audrey H., Alan. M. Beck, Zenithson Ng, „The State of Animal-Assisted Interventions: Addressing the Contemporary Issues That Will Shape the Future” International Journal Environmental Research. Public Health, nr 20 (2019): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16203997.
  12. Girczys-Połedniok Katarzyna, Robert Pudlo, Agnieszka Szymlak, Natalia Pasierb, „Zastosowanie terapii z udziałem zwierząt w praktyce psychiatrycznej” Psychiatria, nr 3 (2014): 171-176.
  13. Glaberson William, „By helping a girl testify at a rape trial, a dog ignites a legal debate” The New York Times, 8 sierpnia 2011. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/09/nyregion/dog-helps-rape-victim-15-testify.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hpw=.
  14. Glenk Lisa M., Sandra Foltin, „Therapy Dog Welfare Revisited: A Review of the Literature” Veterinary Sciences, nr 226 (2021): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci8100226.
  15. Hill Jessica, Carliey Driscoll, Anderson Stephen Cawdell-Smith, Jenny Ziviani, „Investigating Dog Welfare When Interacting with Autistic Children within Canine-Assisted Occupational Therapy Sessions: A Single Case Study” Animals, nr 12 (2023): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13121965.
  16. Kapustka Joanna, Monika Budzyńska, „The use of various animal species for therapeutic purposes in Poland: current perspectives” Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Zootechnica, nr 2 (2020): 3-10. https://doi: 10.21005/asp.2020.19.2.01.
  17. Kennedy Samantha E., More Than Man’s Best Friend: A Look at Attachment Between Humans and Their Canine Companions. USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations, 2005. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/719.
  18. Klarić Miro, Ante Kvesić, Vjekoslav Mandić, Božo Petrov, Tanja Frančišković, „Secondary Traumatisation and Systemic Traumatic Stress”, Medicina Academica Mostariensia, nr 1 (2013): 29-36.
  19. Klubińska Maja, Arkadiusz Lach, „Czynności procesowe na odległość w świetle zasad rzetelnego procesu karnego – perspektywa krajowa na tle rozwiązań międzynarodowych”, [w:] Czynności procesowe na odległość w postępowaniu karnym, red. Arkadiusz Lach, Maja Klubińska. 78-185. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2025.
  20. Klubińska Maja, „Dyrektywa uwzględniania prawnie chronionych interesów pokrzywdzonego i ochrony świadka”, [w:] Czynności procesowe na odległość w postępowaniu karnym, red. Arkadiusz Lach, Maja Klubińska. 170-179. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2025.
  21. Kraus-Kolon Hanna, Radosław Gawlik, „Pies hipoalergiczny – fakt czy mit?” Alergoprofil, nr 2 (2015): 34-40. https://www.journalsmededu.pl/index.php/alergoprofil/article/view/835.
  22. Magiera Angelika M., Weronika Penar, Czesław Klocek, „Możliwości wykorzystania różnych gatunków zwierząt w celach terapeutycznych na przykładzie konia, psa oraz kawii domowej” Medycyna Ogólna i Nauki o Zdrowiu, nr 2 (2020):
  23. 124-128. https://doi.org/10.26444/monz/122072.
  24. McDermot Christine M., Shawn C. Marsh, Monica K. Miller, Reno Taylor, From the Doghouse to the Courthouse: Facility Dogs as Trial Aids for Vulnerable Witnesses.
  25. https://www.ncsc.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/66326/from_the_doghouse_McDermott-Marsh-Miller-Forte.pdf.
  26. Metson Jessica, Dominic Willmott, „Victim Care or Defendant Rights? Assessing Public Attitudes towards Special Measures Designed to Support Vulnerable Witnesses at Trial” Social Sciences, nr 4 (2024): 2-27. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13040198.
  27. Meyer Arial R., Christine M. McDermott, Monica K. Miller, Shawn C. Marsh, „Judges’ perceptions of facility dogs in the courtroom” Juvenile and Family Court Journal, nr 1 (2022): 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12214.
  28. Morgan Anne M., „Victim Rights: Criminal Law: Remembering the ‘Forgotten Person’ in the Criminal Justice System” Marquette Law Review, nr 3 (1987): 572-597.
  29. O’Mahony Conor, Marianne Joyce, Research Report on FYDO: Facility Dogs in Europe, 2022.
  30. O’Mahony Conor, Elizabeth Spruin, Marianne Joyce, „Secondary Victimisation in the Justice System: Facility Dogs to the Rescue” Irish Judicial Studies Journal, nr 3 (2023): 145-160.
  31. Procurator Fiscal Service, Vulnerable victims and witnesses (special measures). https://www.ppsni.gov.uk/vulnerable-or-intimidated-witnesses.
  32. Rock Suzanne, Natalie Gately, „Kids Courts and canines: Evaluating the Justice Facility Dog Program through a therapeutic lens in the Perth Children’s Court” Journal of Criminology, nr 4 (2024): 469-486. https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076241252699.
  33. Sipowicz Kasper, Edyta Najbert, Tadeusz Pietras, Dogoterapia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 2016. „The Canine Comforter” Your Dog, 1 lipca 2021. https://www.pressreader.com/uk/your-dog/20210701/281616718334023?srsltid=AfmBOoqZtr4P9wRqYKW8WxYv1snMd-336Vdi037U6geBbwy05CNvK3Wp

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.