Court Opinion

ID: 9617489
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:56:23.356066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:10.287919
License: Public Domain

Hunt, Justice,
concurring specially.
As to Division 2, I agree that an expert’s testimony that a particular victim in a child abuse case is being truthful is inadmissible. However, it is entirely permissible for an expert on child abuse to testify about the typical characteristics of child abuse victims. See Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612 (277 SE2d 678) (1981). The expert may testify that the victims do not, in general, lie about the abuse. This is an evaluation, based on scientific study, which is not within the ken of the average juror. See State v. Butler, 256 Ga. 448 (349 SE2d 684) (1986). It is then the jury’s duty, aided by the expert’s opinion regarding the general propensity for victims of child abuse to be truthful *139about the abuse, to determine whether the particular victim is truthful.
Decided March 16, 1989
Reconsideration denied March 29, 1989.
Jerry C. Gray, for appellant.
Timothy G. Madison, District Attorney, for appellee.