A Cure for a Non-problem
It is important to understand to whom counterintuitive testimony (delayed disclosure, piecemeal disclosure, etc.) actually applies to and why expert testimony is being given. The focus on CSA behavior is jurors’ perceptions of how a child victim should react. At the start of voir dire the potential members state under oath they do not believe there are any standard reactions for a child victim of sexual assault. The members’ questioning will often include specific aspects of the case, i.e.; delayed reporting, piece-meal disclosure, or continued positive relationship with the accused.

The Bottom Line
If members have already said they do not have any preconceived notions for how a child victim of sexual abuse should react, why is testimony needed to correct non-existent preconceived notions? Are the members lying under oath? Why is a cure needed for a non-problem? What fact of consequence does a cold expert’s testimony make more-or-less probable where the expert is not testifying about the complainant specifically, and the members have already agreed all victims might react differently to an assault?

Here’s how cross might look like.

Q: Dr. Smith, assume the jury members have sworn under oath they have no preconceived notions for how a child might behave, remember or report in reaction to suspected sexual abuse.
A: Okay
Q: How might that change the necessity for your testimony today?
A: I don’t know.
Q: Okay. Well do you believe some of the members of this jury were lying under oath when they said they did not have any preconceived notions for a child’s reactions, recall or disclosure?
A: Well, no.
Q: Can you point out which jury members you think are lying about this?

Remember that an expert might be there to rebut the other sides expert. So that might be their legitimate response on cross. Don’t underestimate this point for Daubert or on cross in the trial phase. Also the judge might not allow you to address what members said  during voir dire. So this line of questioning may need to be done during pretrial motions or Daubert.