|
After literally decades of feminist
lobbying and demands for better treatment of rape victims, many
police agencies across America are still stuck in a 1950s-era
view of sexual assault.
Despite the official promises that victims would be treated with
sensitivity, police frequently don't understand how to achieve
that goal. And although thousands of dedicated law enforcement
officers want to do the right thing, there often is little
support for sex crimes investigators. Rape complaints often are
not properly investigated when police departments don't allocate
the necessary resources to do the work or train their
investigators.
In my 25 years of work as a police officer, sergeant and now as
an independent consultant, I’ve seen dramatic improvements in
some law enforcement agencies. But others have shown little
progress. I’ve seen problems in tiny sheriff’s offices, in big
city departments and in the FBI.
The number of officers who come up to me at lunch, after class
or during a break to tell me they rarely respond to a valid
complaint of sexual assault is surprising to me. Recently, a
22-year female veteran of a state police agency told me she had
never investigated a valid complaint in her entire career. Two
detectives recently approached me and said they had not received
a single valid sexual assault complaint in the five months they
had been assigned to their specialized Unit. When I asked these
detectives about the details of the cases they had been
assigned, they generally cited a number of reasons for believing
the allegation to be false, such as alcohol and/or drugs being
involved or the fact that the victim was uncooperative.
Some of the perception can be explained by looking at the
training often provided to law enforcement officers. For
example, some of the training provided to law enforcement
officers teaches them that any of the following may be
indicators of a false report:
-
Delayed report
-
Report made to a
person other than law enforcement
-
The victim is indifferent to
injuries or seems to experience a lack of pain
-
The victim is extremely vague about
details of the assault, or is extremely detailed
-
The victim attempts to steer away
from unsafe details in the description of the assault, i.e.,
suspect description or location of offense
There are huge differences in the estimates given for the rate
of false reporting of sexual assault. Studies and surveys range
from 0% to 98%. This is not surprising given the differences in
definitions and the different ways of determining a complaint to
be false and then recording it.
In response to this perception of false allegations, some Rape
Crisis Advocates search for a source to counter this argument,
often stating that only 2% of reported rapes are false
allegations, essentially the same rate as other crimes.
The truth is that the data they are citing doesn’t actually
exist. In fact, we have no knowledge of what percentage of
sexual assaults are false on a national level. The number often
cited is from the Crime Index Offenses tracked by the FBI. For
example, the 1997 UCR states that, “a higher percentage of
complaints of forcible rape are determined “unfounded” or found
by investigation to be false, than for any other Index Crime.
While the average of “unfounded” rates for all Crime Index
offenses was 2% in 1997, 8 percent of the forcible rape
complaints were “unfounded” for the same time frame.”
This paragraph is obviously confusing and is often interpreted
by others as though unfounded and false are synonymous. The FBI
Guidelines for the Uniform Crime Report are no clearer: “If the
investigation shows that no offense occurred nor was attempted,
the reported offense can be unfounded for UCR purposes.”
Although a “false allegation” is not defined in the UCR, an
unfounded allegation is defined as baseless OR false.
When unfounding a crime report, an investigator might use a
phrase like, “The elements of the crime could not be met or
established.”
For example: A patrol officer is dispatched to evaluate a sexual
assault. The officer speaks to a victim who reports he was
sexually assaulted because he believes the suspect should have
known that he had not consented to sexual contact beyond
fondling. When the detective received the investigation for
follow-up, she spoke to the victim who admitted there was no
discussion with his partner about what was acceptable nor did
the victim ever say no, or resist in any way. When questioned
further, the victim could not articulate any fear of force.
Based on this information, the detective determined that the
elements of forcible sexual assault or rape had not been met.
Although it is possible that the crime report could be changed
to reflect a less serious offense, i.e., sexual battery, the
original charge of rape would appropriately be unfounded.
I have found that in some agencies, investigators unfound a case
if the investigation doesn’t produce evidence to corroborate or
substantiate the allegation. I believe this practice is in
error, however, one can see that absent guidelines, a variety of
different interpretations are possible. Because investigators
essentially receive little to no training on the UCR, it is
likely that detectives sitting next to each other are using
different standards for clearing their caseload. The problem may
also stem from our work in the area of child sexual abuse since
many Sex Crimes detectives may have started their career as a
detective in Child Abuse and in some police departments,
detectives work sexual assaults involving both children and
adults. Child abuse cases are closed and often reported to state
child protection agencies as unfounded, substantiated or
unsubstantiated. However, Child Abuse cases are not one of the
Crime Index Offenses reported by law enforcement to the FBI.
For example, in California, these terms for case disposition are
defined in the penal code.
11165.12 of the CA penal code states the following definitions
shall control:
(a) "Unfounded report" means a report which is determined by a
child protective agency investigator to be false, to be
inherently improbable, to involve an accidental injury, or not
to constitute child abuse as defined in Section 11165.6 PC.
The section goes on to also define a substantiated report. I
would like to see something similar adopted for sex crimes. For
example, it might read something like:
(a) "Unfounded report" means a report which is determined by a
law enforcement agency investigator to be false, to be
inherently improbable based on the evidence, or not to
constitute a criminal offense as defined in penal code sections
(every state would list their specific penal code sections for
the applicable sex crime offense)
(b) "Substantiated report" means a report which is determined by
a law enforcement agency investigator, based upon some credible
evidence, to constitute a sex crime as defined in penal code
sections...
(c) "Unsubstantiated report" means a report which is determined
by a law enforcement agency investigator not to be unfounded,
but in which the findings are inconclusive and there is
insufficient evidence to determine whether a crime occurred as
defined in penal code sections....
In addition to working with the FBI, the IACP and the National
Sheriffs’ Association to establish clear guidelines and
definitions for scoring and clearing reports, investigators need
quality training so that they can learn to recognize and
effectively respond to sexual assault.
For example, the following should be included in Sex Crimes
Training 101:
-
Sexual assault victims will most likely be acquainted with the suspect(s) in some way
-
The victim rarely expected intimacy and the stereotype of date
rape rarely applies
-
Suspects rarely use weapons. Their weapon is their betrayal
and the victim’s confusion, shame and embarrassment.
-
Victims normally delay hours, day, weeks and months in
reporting their assault. Many never disclose to anyone,
including their closest friends.
-
Victims rarely report to law enforcement or authorities first.
-
Few victims are injured to the point that emergency medical
attention is needed.
-
Alcohol and drugs are involved in a high percentage of sexual
assaults
-
Victims might lie about the circumstances of the sexual
assault because they may feel their actions contributed to the
sexual assault or that they won’t be believed if the case
doesn’t fit the stereotype of rape often depicted in the media.
-
Professionals responding to sexual assault must reassure the
victim that he or she will not be judged and the complaint will
be taken seriously.
-
Sexual assault victims need validation. This is often more
important to them than conviction of the assailant. Regardless
of what anyone else in the system does -- the forensic examiner,
officer, detective, prosecuting attorney, jury or judge -- each
professional has the power to help a person recover from sexual
assault.
-
No matter how much time and heart the investigator or
prosecutor invests in the case, he or she is not the victim. The
investigation must be victim centered at all times.
-
Professionals will burn out if a victim’s inability to
participate in an investigation is taken personally or the
investigation is viewed as a waste of time.
Perhaps most importantly, we need to recognize that there are
false allegations of sexual assault. Although good research in
this area is severely lacking, I believe the numbers are very
low in comparison to property crimes where we see a much higher
incidence of fraud such as arson, automobile accidents, burglary
and theft.
Determining an investigation to be false based on a competent
investigation is not a waste of time. Investigators should
always be commended for conducting a comprehensive, evidence
based investigation. A thorough investigation may exonerate an
innocent person rather than leaving doubt in the minds of
others. I think this reflects the Criminal Justice System at its
best.
|
|
|
1 Part I
Index Offenses are Criminal Homicide, Forcible Rape, Robbery,
Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Larceny, Motor Vehicle Theft and
Arson
2 Crime in the United States, 1997 Uniform Crime
Report, US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation Release Date: Sunday, November 23, 1998, pg. 26
|
|
