La prueba testimonial en el delito de abuso sexual desde una perspectiva epistémica

Abstract

The inherent complexity of human memory and its reconstructive nature pose a fundamental challenge in the assessment of testimonial evidence within the judicial system. In cases of sexual abuse, where direct material evidence is often scarce, the victim’s testimony becomes central to the evidentiary process, requiring a rigorous and context-sensitive evaluation. This study analyzes how epistemic factors influence the evaluation of such testimony and their implications for determining the defendant’s culpability. Using a qualitative approach, it reviews literature on the psychology of testimony and neuroscience, complemented by a normative, doctrinal, and jurisprudential analysis of the Ecuadorian criminal justice system. The findings reveal that memory, particularly in traumatic contexts, is highly susceptible to distortion, and that judges may be influenced by cognitive biases that compromise the objectivity of their assessment. Moreover, this study emphasizes the need to reconsider the current approach to anticipatory testimony, the principle of non-revictimization, and the role of psychological experts from an epistemic perspective. It concludes that specialized training for justice operators and auxiliary bodies, along with the update of interview protocols for victims of sexual crimes, is essential to strengthen the reliability of testimonial evidence and ensure fairer judicial proceedings.