Recent changes to the law in New Zealand have led to a marked increase in experts being called to give evidence in cases of alleged child sexual abuse. Here we outline some of the common misconceptions that are held by expert witnesses in these cases and we review research on patterns of abuse disclosure and retraction, symptoms of abuse, external influences on children's reports, and experts' ability to distinguish true from false reports. We also consider what experts can say about memory that has relevance for these cases. We conclude that many long-held notions of child sexual abuse and children's testimony that make their way into our courtrooms are not supported by empirical research, raising questions about who isand who is notqualified to act as an expert witness.