About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


26 Int'l J. Evidence & Proof 3 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/intjevp26 and id is 1 raw text is: Article F The International Journal of Evidence & Proof Com bating the 'myth of physical 2022 Vol 26('>3- © The Author(s) 2021 restraint' in human trafficking o Article reuse guidelines: and modern slavery trials heard sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/13657127211060555 in the Crown Court ournals.sagepub.comlhomeepi OSAGE Jack Murphy University of Birmingham School of Law, Leicester, UK Abstract The greatest hurdle to an effective criminal justice response to human trafficking is the preva- lence of myths about how exploitation happens and who 'counts' as a genuine victim. This includes the myth that, to be a genuine victim, an individual must have been subject to some form of physical restraint. Previous work has demonstrated how this myth undermines trafficking prosecutions in various jurisdictions. It has demonstrated that, in the absence of physical restraint during their exploitation, victims are deemed to lack credibility. However, what is missing in the current body literature is a robust analysis of whether something should be done to address this issue. By engaging with the foundational principle of accurate fact-find- ing, this article argues that some form of regulation of cross-examination in the English and Welsh jurisdiction, with a view to preventing this myth from manifesting in trials, would be justified. Keywords best evidence, factual accuracy, human trafficking, modern slavery, myths Introduction International law defines human trafficking as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the Corresponding author: Jack Murphy, University of Birmingham School of Law, Leicester, LE9 2AQ, UK. Email: jpm765@student.bham.ac.uk