        
To
add your name to the SATI Mailing List,
click here
|
|
SATI e-News: February 26, 2003
|
|
| |
|
|
|
In This
Issue: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
- OVW Convenes
Focus Groups on Standardization of Rape Exams
- Congress
Reaffirms Commitment to Clery Act on Campus Crime Reporting,
But Changes Likely
-
Prosecutor Seeks to Penalize
Inmates Requesting Frivolous Post Conviction DNA Testing
-
Arkansas Law Allows Crime Lab
Analysts To Testify Via Television
-
Montana Case Review Prompts
Questions About Discrepancies in Forensic Evaluation
Nationwide
- From
Around The Country: OR, KY, AL, CA, TX, OH, NE, NY, PA, LA, NJ
- From
Across the Pond: The United Kingdom
- Promising Practices:
Improving Protocols for Sexual Assault
Exams
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
OVW Convenes
Focus Groups on Standardization of Rape Exams |
|
| |
|
|
| |
The U.S. Department of Justice
Office on Violence Against Women (formerly the Violence Against
Women Office) convened two focus groups within the past year to
evaluate existing standards of training, practice and payment of
sexual assault forensic examinations.
In the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (VAWA 2000) (Public
Law 106-386, section 1405), Congress required the Attorney
General to evaluate existing standards of training and practice
for licensed health care professionals performing sexual assault
forensic examinations and develop a national recommended
standard for training. In addition, the Attorney General is
required to recommend sexual assault forensic examination
training for all health care students. Congress also tasked the
Attorney General to develop a recommended national protocol for
forensic exams and establish a mechanism for its nationwide
dissemination. The goal of the focus groups was to gather input
from relevant disciplines toward the creation of a "working
draft" of the protocol, which will be the basis for further
input and discussion.
Joanne Archambault, President of Sexual Assault Training and
Investigations (SATI), welcomed the discussion. “As I travel
around the country, it is obvious that guidance is needed in
this area. Practices vary widely and protocols are sometimes
nonexistent,” said Archambault (see more in
Promising Practices
article).
The two focus groups included representatives from the criminal
justice (police, prosecutors, and forensic scientists), medical
(doctors and nurses), and victim services professions. Kellie
Greene, a rape survivor and the Executive Director of SOAR
(Speaking Out About Rape), was among the focus group
participants.
According to Greene, “The [focus group] communication has been
open and extensive, and many excellent ideas have been shared.
Services are truly better where they have good protocols in
place, and it is clear that less-equipped facilities should
strive to reach this level.” But Greene noted, “there are many
hurdles to be overcome in terms of funding, personnel, human and
financial resources so these places [with less stringent
standards] can get up to speed with the rest of the country.”
Greene also said many of the focus group participants come from
places that already have best practices in place. She believes
it is important to get more input from localities that have
limited resources and are struggling to establish procedures for
forensic examinations and analysis of the forensic evidence
collected. “Best practices are in the minority,” Greene stated.
“The majority [of the country] has very basic standards and they
are the ones that will be most impacted by any change.” Overall,
Greene is encouraged that a dialogue on this issue is taking
place, and believes it is a significant and positive step
forward.
While supporting the idea of a national standard for forensic
exams, some sex crimes professionals are concerned that it could
be used as a tactic by the defense. If a particular case does
not follow the national protocol for forensic evidence
collection, a defense attorney can call the evidence into
question.
A date has not yet been determined for the release of the OVW
"working document", but SATI e-News will be following
this story closely and providing updates.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Congress
Reaffirms Commitment to Clery Act on Campus Crime Reporting,
But Changes Likely |
|
| |
|
|
| |
A few short weeks after the National
Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU)
appealed to Congress to “simplify or eliminate” the Jeanne Clery
Act, Congress appropriated $750,000 for the U.S. Department of
Education to produce and disseminate a Jeanne Clery Act
compliance handbook to all Title IV institutions that are
eligible for funding.
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), one of the Clery Act’s original
sponsors, introduced the provision, which was included in the
omnibus appropriations package passed by both houses of Congress
mid-February.
The NAICU later clarified in a letter to Congress that they
"have never, and are not now, calling for this law to be
weakened or eliminated." "We are asking that its reporting
provisions be examined to make campus crime information more
useful to students and their families," wrote David Warren the
President of NAICU. An examination of some of the Clery Act's
provisions remains likely.
Originally known as the “Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act
of 1990", the Clery Act requires institutions of postsecondary
education that participate in federal student aid programs to
report campus crime statistics to their students, and the
federal government. It is enforced by the U.S. Department of
Education.
Over a decade later, the definition of crime still varies widely
from campus to campus. For instance, on the campus of Mount St.
Mary's College and Seminary in Emmitsburg, Maryland, unless a
weapon is involved or an ambulance is called, the college's
security department does not notify law enforcement, according
to the school's Public Safety Director, Tom Kiniry. "It's the
victim's responsibility and it's completely up to her," Kiniry
said. "In some cases, she doesn't even want us to know." Three
incidents of sex offenses went unreported to the county in 2001,
according to
gazette.net.
The Clery Act disclosure requirement has generated significant
controversy over the past decade. Many believed that colleges
were underreporting crime data. Those institutions that did
comply felt they were being unfairly penalized, because incoming
freshmen and parents perceived that their schools were more
dangerous, as compared to schools that fudged their numbers.
A National Institute of Justice-funded study confirmed the
suspicions of underreporting. The report, “Campus Sexual
Assault: How America’s Institutions Respond,” found that only
36.5 percent of the nation's colleges and universities comply
with the Clery Act. The study includes information collected
from 2,438 colleges and universities in the United States and
Puerto Rico.
According to S. Daniel Carter of the non-profit watchdog
organization Security On Campus, Inc., the Clery Act handbook
“will ensure that all schools have clear instructions on exactly
how to report their campus crime, and will increase student
safety. Schools will know exactly what the law requires of them,
and dishonest schools will no longer be able to claim they were
confused when they are caught underreporting their campus
crime,” Carter said.
The "Clery Act" is named in memory of 19 year-old Lehigh
University freshman Jeanne Ann Clery who was raped and murdered
while asleep in her residence hall room on April 5, 1986.
Jeanne's parents, Connie and Howard, discovered that students
hadn't been told about 38 violent crimes on the Lehigh campus in
the three years before her murder.
Sources:
NAICU
proposal, January 2003.
NAICU Statement of Support for the Jeanne Clery Act,
February 7, 2003.
“Colleges don’t report sex assault stats,” The Cincinnati
Enquirer, August 2002.
“Mount St. Mary’s does not report most crimes,”
gazette.net,
December 19, 2002.
For more information about the Jeanne Clery Act:
http://www.securityoncampus.org/schools/cleryact/index.html
“Campus Sexual Assault: How America’s Institutions of Higher
Education Respond”, National Institute of Justice, August
2002
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Prosecutor Seeks to Penalize
Inmates Requesting Frivolous Post Conviction DNA Testing |
|
| |
|
|
| |
After the DNA tests of two convicted rapists confirmed
their guilt last month, St. Louis, Missouri prosecutor and circuit
attorney Jennifer Joyce decided it was time to push back.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Joyce is drafting
legislation--thought to be the first in the nation—which attempts
to deter “frivolous” requests for post conviction DNA testing.
Joyce’s staff spent scores of hours and thousands of dollars
on those tests, and victims were distraught to learn that their
traumas were being aired again. One rape victim became suicidal
and then vanished; her family has not heard from her for months,
according to the LA Times.
Joyce’s proposal would require inmates to pay for the
analysis unless they are exonerated (the DNA testing costs up to
$2,500). In addition, she would like to see requests that confirm
guilt serve as a black mark for the inmate’s probation and parole
boards. These individuals would also be subject to an existing
statute barring frivolous lawsuits, which adds 60 days to a
sentence.
St. Louis freed one convicted rapist last summer after DNA
exonerated him,
but tests performed on two other rapists last year and in 2001
came back positive. The frustration experienced in St. Louis is
felt elsewhere across the nation. According to the Innocence
Project, 60% of the inmates it represents prove to be guilty when
the DNA comes back, even though the organization closely screens
all requests before accepting a case.
The requests for post-DNA conviction testing are competing for
limited resources in an already overburdened system. A U.S.
Department of Justice survey found that 81% of crime labs have
fallen well behind in their work. The backlog includes more than
16,000 criminal cases, which would take about eight months to work
through assuming not a single new test request came in.
Although she does not yet have the weight of a law behind her,
Joyce is refusing to test DNA from two other old sexual assaults,
on the basis that the analysis would not prove guilt or innocence,
given the circumstances of the cases. Lawyers for the inmates
involved are seeking to charge Joyce with contempt of court for
withholding the biological evidence.
Sources:
“DNA tests for inmates debated,” Los Angeles Times,
February 10, 2003.
“DNA test points to man jailed for rape, Toronto Star,
January 12, 2003.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Arkansas Law Allows Crime Lab
Analysts To Testify Via Television |
|
| |
|
|
| |
In an attempt to help alleviate its extensive forensic
backlog, Arkansas passed a law in 2001 to allow crime lab analysts
to testify via television from the Crime Lab in Little Rock. The
system allows the lab analysts to remain in Little Rock until
their testimony is needed, at which time they go before the
camera, testify and return to work, all within a matter of
minutes.
Jim Clark, the Arkansas Crime Lab Director, told the Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette that testifying at court hearings around the
state is one of the largest demands on his staff. Remote testimony
can save at least a day of the analyst’s time spent traveling to
and from the trial venue.
But only one county in the state is taking advantage of the
technology, and so it has yet to have a significant impact on the
backlog of cases. Meanwhile, law enforcement officials say the
trail is growing cold on many of their cases. A police detective
from the Fort Smith Police Department told the
Arkansas-Democrat Gazette that their biggest problem is
getting drug tests back from the Little Rock Crime Lab (they
process fingerprint evidence in-house). Due to a strained state
budget, it is unlikely that more financial resources will be
allocated to forensics.
The Arkansas crime lab employs 105 staff, which handled 24,074
cases in 2001—approximately 1,000 more cases than a decade ago.
The lab serves 500-600 law enforcement agencies throughout the
state.
Source:
“Forensic Backlog at Crime Lab Letting Trails Go Cold,
Investigators Say,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 30,
2003.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Montana Case Review Prompts
Questions About Discrepancies in Forensic Evaluation
Nationwide |
|
| |
|
|
| |
A recent National Public Radio (NPR) segment highlighted the
exoneration of several inmates due to faulty forensic evaluation
during the initial trial. The focus of the report was the case in
Montana where faulty hair analysis kept an innocent man in prison
for 15 years. The discovery led to a review of dozens of other
cases in which Arnold Melnikoff, the State’s former Crime Lab
Director and Analyst in this case, participated (for details, see
story in the
January 2003 issue of SATI e-News.
Wendy Kaufman, the NPR reporter, speculated, “But just how good
are the labs and the scientists who work in them? There are no
mandatory proficiency exams, no mandatory certification
requirements and no standardized curriculum for forensic
scientists. Only the state of New York requires that labs be
accredited, and only New York has a regulatory agency responsible
for setting standards and ensuring compliance. Of the 600 or so
forensic labs in the country, just 240 have been accredited by the
American Society of Crime Lab Directors.”
Kaufman said that Frank Fitzpatrick of the American Society of
Crime Lab Directors told her that lab directors don’t want to see
their scientists and their labs under fire in the courtroom. They
don’t want to have to explain why their lab isn’t accredited, so
more and more of them are aggressively trying to beef up their
training and quality assurance programs. But getting the funds to
do that isn’t easy, Fitzpatrick told Kaufman.
Also participating in the NPR segment were Jimmy Ray Bromgard, the
Montana man who was freed last month, Peter Neufeld, an attorney
with the Innocence Project, Rocky Treppiedi, lawyer for Arnold
Melnikoff and Mike McGrath, Montana Attorney General. According to
McGrath, “We have some old cases that we’ve been asked to look at,
and we’ve done that. We’re also doing a review of other cases and
trying to determine how many times he testified, and then, if he
did testify, what his testimony was. And that’s a fairly tedious
process.”
Source:
“Analysis: Discrepancies in forensic evidence and the impact
on trial,” National Public Radio (NPR), January 26, 2003.
^top of
page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
From
Around The Country: OR, KY, AL, CA, TX, OH, NE, NY, PA, LA, NJ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
The following news summaries in this
section are reprinted with permission from the DNA Legislation
& News, published by Smith Alling Lane, a government affairs
firm that provides nationwide governmental affairs services to
Applied Biosystems:
http://www.dnaresource.com. (Note: Headlines added.)
Oregon Layoffs
Hit Troopers, Lab Techs
In Oregon, the first round of layoffs, due to budget cuts,
have hit the state patrol and crime lab. Oregon State Police will
lose 286 positions, including almost 100 scientists and
technicians in crime laboratories. In Portland, the 11-member
staff at the state DNA lab has been cut to four. They no longer
will enter DNA data from convicts into national database that last
year matched offenders to 143 crimes. Some troopers may be rehired
if the Legislature quickly approves a new state-police budget. But
the technicians likely will end up moving to other states where
demand for their skills is high, and many may be reluctant to
return.
Source:
“Oregon lays off troopers, lab techs,” The Seattle Times,
February 2, 2003.
Kentucky
Crime Lab Staggers Under Load of Cases
The Kentucky state crime lab receives about 40,000 new cases a
year, about half of which have been drug identification cases. The
labs still have 9,000 overall cases left over from 2002. The 2002
General Assembly approved the hiring of 26 new employees over two
years, but provided just $500,000 to hire 11 workers before last
year’s job freeze. Some prosecutors have had cases dismissed due
to backlogged crime lab analysis.
Source:
“Crime Lab staggers under load of cases,” Lexington
Herald-Leader, February 9, 2003.
Running in Place at Alabama
Crime Labs
In Alabama, with a backlog of about 2,000 DNA cases, and a
struggle for any new funds and staff, it’s not unusual for
forensics work in an Alabama murder case to take about two years.
The backlogs are steep in other sections, too, but where the lab
is hurting most is in DNA, according to the new Chief. Things got
so bad last year, then-Gov. Don Siegelman released a one-time $1
million grant from his emergency fund to augment the legislative
allocation and prevent the department from having to cut some
services. And just recently, U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL),
announced a one-time $1 million grant from the U.S. Department of
Justice, which is expected to further ease the crunch.
Source:
“Running in place: Funds, staff lacking at state crime labs,”
The Associated Press State & Local Wire, January 26, 2003.
Westerfield Conviction Cost $270,000
Prosecutors in San Diego spent nearly $270,000 convicting
David Westerfield of kidnapping and killing 7-year-old Danielle
van Dam—which does not include the salaries of the prosecutors and
district attorney’s investigators involved in the case, or the
money spent by police and other law enforcement agencies that
investigated the girl’s abduction. The biggest expense for
prosecutors was DNA analysis, with the office spending $152,712.
Source:
“Westerfield conviction cost $270,000,” The San Diego
Union-Tribune, February 7, 2003.
Texas May Rein
in Forensic Labs
A bill has been introduced in the state legislature that would
create a Forensic Science Review Committee within the Department
of Public Safety to regulate and oversee the activities of the
forensic laboratories in the state.
Source:
Texas HB (House Bill) 353
Houston
Suspends DNA Testing After FBI Cites Lab for Deficiencies;
DNA Evidence To Be Retested
An audit of the Houston, Texas crime laboratory found that the
lab was not in compliance with FBI standards for DNA analysis. The
lab has since suspended DNA testing. The audit, conducted by crime
lab professionals, also said lab workers weren’t properly trained
and found deficiencies in interpreting and documenting DNA test
results. DNA testing at the lab was halted after the department
learned of the audit December 13th. Private labs will do the
retesting.
In a related story, the 1999 rape conviction of a 16 year-old boy,
which relied primarily on DNA evidence, has been called into
question because samples were processed at the Houston Police
Department crime lab. Forensic scientists say the evidence against
the inmate was handled so poorly that the lab more likely than not
came up with incorrect results. This case is one of hundreds under
review after an audit by outside experts uncovered widespread
deficiencies at the lab, where DNA testing has been temporarily
suspended.
Sources:
“DNA evidence to be retested after deficiencies found in
Houston police crime lab,” The Associated Press, January
18, 2003.
“Experts review case of convicted rapist,” The Houston
Chronicle, February 1, 2003.
Suspect
Apprehended in OSU Rapes
In Ohio, a man suspected of raping at least six Ohio State
University students was named in a 15-count indictment. Police
said he was a strong suspect in at least 13 rapes in the Columbus
area since May. During the arraignment, the lead investigator in
the case said the suspect has been linked to one of the incidents
through DNA evidence taken from saliva left at the scene of the
assault. He previously served seven years in prison after being
convicted of attempted rape in Cuyahoga County.
Source:
“Suspect in Ohio State U. area rape case indicted,” University
Wire, January 27, 2003.
Nebraska Court Hears First Challenge
Under State’s Post Conviction DNA Law
The Nebraska Supreme Court will hear what is believed to be
the first challenge to a new law requiring the state to perform
post conviction DNA tests. The state’s DNA-testing law requires
prosecutors to preserve DNA evidence and give notice if they plan
to discard it. It also allows the state to pay for DNA testing if
the person is indigent. The court might use this case to clarify
the parameters for when DNA testing should be granted. The inmate
is asking to have DNA tests performed on a cigarette butt, which
allegedly link him to the scene of the crime. The prosecution has
denied requests for additional testing saying that such testing
“would not and could not” determine if he was innocent.
Source:
“Court to hear first challenge under Nebraska’s DNA-testing law,”
The Associated Press State & Local Wire, February 4, 2003.
Convicts Who
Plead Guilty Can Claim Innocence
In a case of first impression, a Texas Criminal Court of Appeals
ruled 5-4 that there is nothing explicit in its 1996 ruling in Ex
Parte Elizondo that prohibits or limits a court’s analysis of an
actual innocence claim to jury or bench trials. The CCA held in
Elizondo that a “bare innocence” claim is within a court’s
jurisdiction on a habeas corpus writ application, meaning that a
defendant’s guilty plea does not preclude him from claiming in a
post-conviction writ application that new evidence (such as DNA)
establishes his innocence. Prosecutors contend that the ruling
will lead to a wave of habeas application from convicts who
pleaded guilty but now claim they have new evidence of their
innocence.
Source:
“Convicts who pleaded guilty can claim innocence,” Texas Lawyer,
December 30, 2002.
Governor’s
Proposed Budget Includes Fees for NY Sex Offenders
The New York Governor’s proposed budget includes new fees of up to
$50 for sex offenders to enter the DNA databank and the state’s
sex offender registry ($800,000).
Source:
“Fee impositions or increases proposed in 2003-04 Executive
Budget,” The Associated Press State & Local Wire, January
29, 2003.
DA Faults
Prosecutor for Filing Sexual Assault Charges Too Early
After an internal review, a California District Attorney concluded that a
prosecutor should have waited for the results of lab tests and
pushed police for better evidence before filing charges in two sex
cases that were dismissed after DNA tests cleared both suspect.
Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy said that
former ADA Dave Davies should not have authorized charges against
a San Jose man accused of trying to kill and sexually assault his
mother and a Palo Alto preschool teacher.
Source:
“DA faults prosecutor for filing sex charges,” San Jose Mercury
News, February 11, 2003
DNA Evidence
Clears Rape Suspect Who Hanged Himself in Jail
In Pennsylvania, DNA evidence posthumously cleared a rape
suspect who killed himself in a police holding cell. The suspect
had used his shirt to hang himself the same day he was arrested
for the rape of an 18-year-old woman who identified the man as her
attacker. Recently returned tests show his DNA did not match the
semen sample collected from the victim.
Source:
“DNA evidence clears rape suspect who hanged himself in jail,”
The Associated Press, January 9, 2003.
Rape Kits and Other Evidence
Goes Missing in New Orleans
The New Orleans Police Department is reviewing the destruction of
evidence from old cases, some dating back 10 years or more.
Potentially hundreds, perhaps thousands, of individual items were
destroyed, sold or discovered missing during a major clean-up of
the Central Evidence and Property Room about two years ago. The
effort began as a routine purge of evidence that was no longer
needed, but it expanded into a massive shelf-clearing in which
items allegedly were destroyed after being listed in an inventory
or moved to smaller containers. The missing evidence includes rape
kits.
“Evidence missing at NOPD storage,” The Times-Picayune,
February 4, 2003.
Orchid Cellmark Launches Rapid
Forensic DNA Analysis Service
Orchid Cellmark (www.orchidcellmark.com)
announced the launch of a new “DNA Express Service” for local law
enforcement agencies. The new service delivers forensic DNA
results for “no-suspect” and other criminal cases within five
business days, compared to the standard average turn-around time
of four to five weeks for routine casework.
Source:
Orchid Cellmark press release, January 15, 2003.
DNA Plan Could Hit Probation
Staff Hard
The New York Governor’s proposal to expand the state’s DNA
database to include all convicted criminals instead of just
violent felons could inundate an already overburdened county
probation department, its director said. The Broome County
Probation Department processed about 200 DNA tests last year for
defendants either sentenced to probation or given a conditional
discharge on charges classified as “violent.” Under Pataki’s
proposal, that number would likely increase by hundreds and be the
responsibility of a department that lost five probation officers
to retirement last fall.
Source:
“State Of The State—DNA plan could hit probation staff hard,”
Press & Sun Bulletin (Binghamton, NY), January 9, 2003.
Former Parole Officer Receives
Probation
In New Jersey, a 38 year-old parole officer, William Ryniak, was
sentenced to three years probation for criminal sexual contact
with a woman parolee he was supervising. The man pleaded guilty to
the charges, saying he engaged in the sex act during a visit to
the woman’s home in March 2001. The victim saved a semen-stained
washcloth, and the DNA was traced back to the suspect. He was
fired shortly after the charges were filed, and the plea bans him
from public employment.
Source:
“Former parole officer receives probation,” The Record
(Bergen County, NJ), January 25, 2003.
Pennsylvania Legislation Would
Provide Minimum Requirements for Forensic Exam
A bill recently introduced in the Pennsylvania state legislature
would provide minimum requirements for hospitals and health care
facilities, which provide emergency services to victims of sexual
assault, and for a sexual assault evidence collection program.
Source:
SB (Senate Bill) 41, Sexual Assault Testing and Evidence
Collection Act.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
From
Across the Pond: The United Kingdom |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Scotland Yard Balks at Home
Office Plan to Sell-Off Forensics Service
In England, the Home Office is proposing to privatize the Forensic
Science Service (FSS) in a highly controversial move which police
claim could leave them unable to afford to investigate certain
crimes. The Government wants to sell over half of the FSS to a
private company within the next two years, with the option of
selling the entire service in the future. Although the FSS is
currently government-owned it charges the police for its service,
but insiders claim a lot of work is done for free because of the
public sector ethos.
England’s DNA database averages 5,000 cold hits per month, and
there is more than a 40 per cent change of DNA found at a crime
scene matching a name on the database. In 2000-2001, 14,785 crimes
were detected using the DNA database compared with 8,612 the
previous year.
Meanwhile, in an effort dubbed Operation Phoenix, London police
have reopened 1,544 unsolved rape cases over 16 years because
improvements in forensic analysis could now link rapists to the
crime. The “cold cases review,” dating back to 1987, will include
DNA samples from clothes and other materials that could not be
tested at the time. The review is the biggest ever undertaken by a
force.
Sources:
“Police furious over forensics sell-off plans,” The Observer,
January 19, 2003.
“Focus DNA; Could the latest science solve these murders and 1,500
rapes?” Sunday Express, February 9, 2003.
“Unsolved rapes face DNA review,” The Times (London),
February 5, 2003.
“DNA conviction may herald sex crimes breakthrough,” The
Northern Echo, January 25, 2003.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Promising
Practices: Message From the Desk of the SATI Training Director:
Standard Protocols for Rape Exams By Joanne Archambault, Founder and Training Director,
Sexual Assault Training & Investigations |
|
| |
|
|
| |
I was glad to learn that the
Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) is addressing the issue
of standards and protocols for rape exams (see related e-news
article). It is unfortunate that events of 9-11 delayed the
process, (the first focus group was slated to happen in Chicago
on September 13, 2001). This is an extensive undertaking for the OVW. The process is moving forward in a deliberate and
thoughtful manner, which certainly makes sense for an important
issue with such widespread implications.
As I travel around the country, it is obvious that such guidance
is sorely needed in this area. Practices vary widely and
protocols are sometimes nonexistent.
As an example, I recently provided training in a rural area of
Texas. Officers/deputies are extremely frustrated because the
County hospital had established a “Sexual Assault Response
Team.” Two of the counties had advocates (these agencies
referred to these system advocates as advocates but for clarity,
I will refer to them as crisis interventionists) working within
the Police Departments. When questioned, the crisis
interventionists stated they have confidentiality. The crisis
interventionists respond directly to the scene to immediately
assist the victim, providing immeasurable support at the scene
for the responding officers/deputies. In this case, if a
forensic examination is warranted based on the type of assault
and the length of time lapsed between the assault and the
report, the officer transports the victim to the County
Hospital. Hospital staff will only call a Rape Crisis Center
advocate after the officer and victim arrive at the hospital.
Because the advocates cover a very large geographical area, many
hours often pass before they arrive.
In an attempt to practice a team approach, the officers said the
forensic examiner will not begin the exam before the community
based advocate arrives. At that time, although the crisis
interventionist has already been working with the victim and
most likely established some level of trust and rapport, the
crisis interventionist is removed and replaced with the
community based advocate and the exam begins. Interestingly,
when questioned, the officers said that the examiner does not
appear to have any special training and they do not use a
colposcope. Clearly, this community has attempted to put
together a Sexual Assault Response Team to provide more
efficient, victim centered services. However, the officers and
crisis interventionists said it is common for the exam to take
6-8 hours. The officers’ response is to take the victim to
another hospital. I do not believe this is an acceptable answer.
Communities must identify all the stakeholders who should be
involved in appropriately responding to sexual assault. They
must collaborate to put together a system that works effectively
for everyone, especially the survivor. This “system” is clearly
not working for anyone. Depending on your community size and
resources, modifications to a traditional SART might need to be
made.
Another example I have heard over and over again, is the
frustration survivors and members of the SART experience when
there is a need for an interpreter or a person to assist with
some aspect of the examination. I have heard arguments that an
advocate cannot interpret or hold a ruler for example, because
the advocate would then become a witness. The advocate is a
witness regardless, the minute he/she becomes involved in the
investigation. A valid argument is that the advocate changes
roles, and now becomes focused on assisting the officer or
examiner, versus solely focusing on the needs of the victim.
But, what if it will take hours to find another person who
speaks the language of the survivor or one who can sign? Other
options must be available. Perhaps, a second advocate could
respond to take over the role of advocate. Or if that’s not
possible, how about explaining the situation to the survivor and
providing her with choices. It is clear that we have a lot of
work to do before we can say that we are truly operating as a
team or that collaborating goes beyond developing a protocol
that looks good on paper but cannot be practiced by those
working in the field.
I look forward to learning about the discussions and
recommendations from the Office for Violence Against Women about
rape exam standards and protocols. You can be sure that we will
share with you the OVW’s working document, as soon as it is made
available, and also let you know how to participate in the
dialogue as standardization moves forward. In the meantime,
there are many communities who are working hard to identify the
obstacles and improve their responses to sexual assault.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
For a list of upcoming
conferences and training events, please view the
Training Schedule. |
|
| |
|
|
|
>Back to
Resources Main Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|