SATI e-News: February 4, 2005

Promising Practices: From the Desk of the Training Director

Untangling the Issues of False vs. Unfounded Sexual Assault Reports
By Joanne Archambault, Training Director, SATI, Inc. and Dr. Kim Lonsway, Director of Research, EVAW International

 
As all of us in the field know, one of the most powerful and pervasive myths in society regarding sexual assault is the notion that women lie about rape – the idea that claims of sexual assault are routinely fabricated. Perhaps no other belief does more to damage the credibility of sexual assault victims as they seek help from friends, family, social services, and the criminal justice system. This is particularly true because sexual assault cases that are viewed with the most suspicion are those perpetrated by someone known to the victim, without a weapon, severe violence, or signs of physical injury -- in other words, the most common type of sexual assault in the real world. However, because these typical dynamics of sexual assault are so very different from our stereotype of “real rape” (i.e., stranger rape, with a weapon and injury), it is perhaps the greatest irony of our field that the typical dynamics of sexual assault are those most likely to raise suspicion among police officers, prosecutors, and the general public.
 
In this Promising Practices article, I’d like to describe a research project that we at EVAW International have undertaken to take these issues head on and figure out the best way to move forward. In a nutshell, we have started a research project to try to sort out which types of sexual assault cases are actually being unfounded by law enforcement agencies across the country, which types of cases should be unfounded, and how many of these cases could reasonably be considered to be false.
 
In the last few “Promising Practices” articles in SATI e-news, I have featured some efforts currently underway around the country to counter the damaging effects of this particular myth regarding false allegations. For example, in the last issue I challenged the use of release waivers, which are all too often used to shut down the investigation of sexual assault cases that are difficult and/or viewed with suspicion. Within some agencies, these release waivers are presented to sexual assault victims within hours of their initial contact with police. For victims who are traumatized, confused, disoriented, and scared, signing such a release waiver may seem like a good way to make the police and the rape “go away.” The reality is the agency is more interested in insulating their liability than providing those services that will actually protect and serve not just the welfare of that one victim, but an entire community. In my opinion, it is the release form that ought to go away – at least this particular one and in such early stages of an investigation. If a waiver is used, it should be used judiciously and it should only indicate that the victim has asked the investigator/department NOT to conduct an investigation. The trauma of the sexual assault and the consequences may very well prevent a victim from having the emotional stamina needed to participate in an investigation at that time. Every effort should be made to build trust and rapport with the victim. She should be confident that the case will be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly at any time if she is later able to pursue the investigation and possible prosecution.
 
In an effort to counter this myth that women routinely lie about rape, many victim advocates and others have used statistics of how many sexual assault charges are unfounded by law enforcement. This strategy is understandable, especially in community education programs, because the law enforcement statistics provide a sense of objectivity to the point being made -- suggesting that police have determined that only a very small percentage of sexual assault cases are false. Unfortunately, this use of unfounding statistics is misleading at best and contributes to an atmosphere where even law enforcement professionals are often unclear as to the true meaning of “unfounded” versus a “false” allegation. Again, I explored these issues in a previous “Promising Practices” article, where I tried to sort out some of the confusing terminology used in this area, such as “unfounded,” “unsubstantiated,” and “false.”
 
A related question pertains to the use of “exceptional clearance” which is another way that police agencies can close a case administratively. We want to find out exactly how this clearance category is used, and how it should be used. Unfortunately, as with unfounding, there is evidence that some law enforcement agencies are also using “exceptional clearance” and other means to avoid investigating sexual assault cases that are difficult or viewed with suspicion. The research begun by EVAW International, led by Dr. Kim Lonsway, the Principal Investigator, will hopefully help us to untangle some of these complex and challenging issues, and develop training and technical assistance materials to provide meaningful guidance for police practitioners and others.
 
In general, we have three primary objectives for this research project. First, we hope to work with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs’ Association to clarify the UCR guidelines for unfounding, exceptional clearance, and other ways to close/clear/cancel a crime report. This clarification will then be used to develop training and technical assistance materials to provide real guidance for law enforcement professionals seeking to appropriately clear/close/cancel their cases. Second, we hope to identify “best practices” in law enforcement agencies across the country that work especially well and can serve as a model for others. These best practices will also be described in the training and technical assistance materials. We know that police professionals across the country are struggling with these issues, and trying to figure out how to deal with them appropriately. So our sincere hope for this project is that it will allow us to produce materials that will be useful for people as they craft policies, practices, and protocols in this area.
 
However, the third objective is the one that might prove the most difficult. Specifically, our third objective is to find out more about how law enforcement agencies across the country actually use unfounding and exceptional clearance to clear/close/cancel their cases. As I travel around the country, law enforcement professionals describe countless different terms and mechanisms for clearing/closing/canceling their cases – in other words, “putting them to bed” or removing them from their active case load. But although these practitioners often insist on how different their agency is from others, I am always struck by how similar the underlying practices actually are. In other words, although there are a hundred different terms and specific practices, law enforcement agencies across the country all too often use the same general strategies, often times avoiding cases that are difficult to sort out, or perhaps those cases with victims who are viewed with suspicion. This third objective is therefore designed to break through all the differences in terminology and specific practices, to find out exactly how police agencies actually deal with their difficult cases. In the beginning, we plan to focus on the cases that are unfounded and exceptionally cleared. However, in future research we hope to expand the project to include a complete biopsy of the entire sexual assault caseload in several different law enforcement agencies, analyzing in detail the information provided in the investigative case files and the way in which it was disposed.
 
For the current research project, we have proposed to gather 300 sexual assault case files from a variety of police agencies from around the country – agencies of very different sizes, types, and geographic areas. So we at EVAW International have been on the phone recently, contacting people we know in police agencies across the U.S. to ask if they would be willing to participate in this study by providing a sample of their sexual assault case files for us to analyze. You might think that many police agencies would balk at the idea of handing over their sexual assault case files to a couple of researchers to poke around with. Chances are, the researchers might just end up exposing something they did wrong.
 
This isn’t the case at all. To date, we have 14 law enforcement agencies from across the country who have signed letters of agreement saying they will participate in this study. I can’t tell you how excited we are. First, it confirms my belief that this is one of the most challenging and urgent issues in the field of sexual assault response, particularly among law enforcement professionals. Second, it fills my heart with gratitude and hope that so many agencies would come on board so enthusiastically. I wish I could acknowledge those agencies publicly for their willingness to participate, but of course we have to protect their confidentiality (you know who you are... thank you!). I also want to invite others to participate in the study. If you think your police agency would be interested in being involved in this project, please contact me. I think it is a testimony to the good faith of those in the field of sexual assault investigation, that so many departments have signed on and that so many others have expressed interest in finding out more and learning from the research. It is obvious that many chiefs and sheriff’s across the country are willing to be proactive. Personally, I think it would be wonderful for a police chief or sheriff to say that they opened their doors to an audit so that they could either confirm that they are using best practices or to identify and correct any deficiencies that might be identified as a result of the research.
 
For those interested in the details of the study, Dr. Lonsway will develop a coding system to classify the 300 sexual assault case files into the following categories:

• Cases that are reasonably determined to be false, based on the evidence included in the investigative case file.

• Cases that appear to have been properly unfounded or exceptionally cleared, based on the evidence included in the investigative case file (this would also include the cases in the category above, of those determined to be false.)

• Cases that do not appear to have been properly unfounded or exceptionally cleared, based on the evidence included in the investigative case file.

• Cases that require further investigation before making the clearance decision.

These classifications will be made by expert police raters, based on a detailed review of the information and materials included in the investigative case files. In addition to these very broad categories, a much finer grained analysis will also focus on evaluating the quality of case files and finding out exactly what information is documented. For example, the expert police raters will evaluate the extent to which the officers and investigators:

• Documented all investigative actions taken.

• Described any evidence that was collected, including laboratory reports.

• Included detailed accounts of all victim and witness interviews and statements.

• Included detailed accounts of all suspect interrogations and statements.

• Described the sexual assault, including detailed information about all sexual contact.

• Noted whether the victim had consensual sex with a partner within 96 hours of the rape, and described any information or evidence collected from the consensual partner.

• Prepared the report with clear and coherent writing.

• Developed the case materials for prosecution as either a consent or an identification case.

• Referred the case to a prosecutor’s office.

This type of analysis will provide a rare glimpse into actual police practices when investigating sexual assault cases that are eventually cleared through unfounding or exceptional clearance. The lessons learned will then be incorporated into the training and technical assistance materials already mentioned. We hope these materials will be disseminated widely, and used by: (1) police officers, investigators, and supervisors who respond to sexual assault crimes; (2) rape crisis advocates and other professionals involved in sexual assault response; (3) and rape prevention educators. Given the lack of existing materials on this topic, we hope that these resources will represent a state-of-the-art educational initiative that will truly move the field forward. Such research really is a “Promising Practice” that we can work on together. If you want to find out more, send me an email at Joanne@evawinc.com.