Child Abuse, when alleged, is not a criminal matter.  It is blithely characterized as a "Civil" matter, much the same as a lawsuit to collect on a breach of contract.  Thus, the Constitutional protections afforded in a criminal case are not necessarily extended to those accused of Child Abuse.  See YOUR Constitutional Rights and Miranda Right.

However, neither is a Child Abuse case a Civil case.  If it were, prior to trial, the opposing legal team would NOT have access to the defendant beyond taking his deposition. 

• Motions for discovery would be honored.  
   
• The opposing legal team would certainly NOT hold one of the defendant's family members hostage to coerce statements from or use as leverage against our defendant to compel his cooperation.  See Kidnapping
   
• If this were a Civil case, if our defendant prevailed in court, he would be entitled to legal fees and damages.  In a Child Abuse case, he is NOT.
   
• And finally, the case DOES become a Criminal case, after the "investigation" is completed without the accused enjoying benefit of his Constitutional rights. At which time, the charges are piled so deep, no lawyer wants to untangle them, and a Plea Bargain may be the ONLY way out.

The star witness in a Child Abuse case has become the "child", by proxy of credentialed professionals.  

In the 1980's Miami prosecutors devised a nationally-imitated method to win child molestation convictions. The Miami prosecutors pioneered a new technique: the use of child psychologists to "tease" memories out of children.  A system was constructed whereby credentialed professionals became the child's advocate and presumed to SPEAK FOR the child.  Or as popularized- "In the best interest of the child".  

This was known as the "Miami Method".  

There is virtually no defense against the Miami Method.  The prosecutors create the evidence and propel the entire case through court unchallenged, control every aspect and actor (including the court-appointed attorney) in the case with no accountability, and complete impunity. See Nifonged

In court, licensed professionals (and now, mere CPS employees and VOLUNTEERS, such as CASA workers) speaking presumptuously "In the best interest of the child" enjoy "particularized guarantees of trustworthiness" A.K.A "Trustworthiness Doctrine" for their (often) second and third-hand HEARSAY.  (Now, even when caught in a BALD FACED LIE, it matters not to Constitutionally "unencumbered" Walther-type "judges", who consider themselves "part of the prosecution team".

In a perfect, altruistic world, licensed professionals might operate honestly and fairly. But government, the usurper of public welfare, has degenerated into a vast series of bureaucratic monarchies. Unfortunately, the spoils system that has grown up around them gives interest groups a stake in perpetuating them.

============================

Article Adapted from-
AFRA Analysis: Hearsay evidence ruled Unconstitutional 
March 11, 2004 7:30pm PST
Updated March 13, 2004 12:56pm PST