         
To
add your name to the SATI Mailing List,
click here
|
|
SATI e-News: April 7, 2003
|
|
| |
|
|
|
In This
Issue: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
- Sexual Assault News
- Forensic News
- Promising Practices: From
the Desk of the Training Director
|
|
| |
**Sexual
Assault News** |
|
| |
|
|
| |
DOE Rules
on Harvard Title IX Investigation After University Modifies
Sexual Misconduct Policy |
|
| |
|
|
| |
An eight-month investigation
by the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) concluded late last week
that Harvard College’s new policy of requiring students to provide “corroborating
information” before it will investigate their complaints of sexual
assault is not a violation of Title IX, the federal law that bars
discrimination in education on the basis of gender. However, the
DOE’s ruling was based on Harvard’s current policy, which has been
amended since it first went into effect in September of last year.
As reported in
the
September 2, 2002 issue of SATI e-News, Harvard raised the
standard of proof in disciplinary procedures governing rape and
sexual assault cases through a faculty vote in May of 2002.
Harvard wanted to avoid lengthy “he said-she said” disputes with
minimal evidence and few prospects for resolution, according to
the
Boston Globe.
Indeed, a
survey of Harvard students’ health attitudes and behavior
conducted by University Health Services (UHS), in partnership with
the American College Health Association (ACHA), did find a
statistically significant rise in reported incidents of sexual
assault at Harvard last year, according to the Harvard Crimson.
The percentage of students who were involved in sexual touching
against their will increased to 9.7 in 2002, up from 7.6% in
2000. Of the respondents, 0.9 percent reported actual sexual
penetration against their will, while the national average was 1.8
percent in 2000.
In June,
Attorney Wendy J. Murphy filed a complaint with the DOE’s Office
of Civil Rights (OCR) on behalf of a Harvard student. The
original policy, which passed by faculty vote in May 2002,
required eyewitness, physical evidence, and other “sufficient
independent corroboration”. The corroboration requirements have
since changed. Murphy believes that the DOE investigation helped
prompt these and other policy revisions, although a Harvard
spokesman declined to comment on Murphy’s assertion.
Instead of
“sufficient independent corroboration,” Harvard now requires only
a list of “supporting information.” Murphy told SATI e-News
that “the elimination of the word ‘independent’ is important
because it means a student can ‘self-corroborate’.” According to
the Boston Globe, Harvard defines “supporting information”
as diary entries or conversations with roommates—virtually
anything that helps to corroborate a student’s account.
Murphy noted
that other changes Harvard made to its policy since September are
significant. “The elimination of the word ‘sufficient’ means no
person at Harvard has discretion to weigh or determine whether the
‘supporting information’ rises to a worthy level,” she explained.
An additional change to the policy requires
Harvard to obtain a responsive statement from the accused student,
whether or not the accuser meets the standards of corroboration.
Harvard has also created a committee focused on education and
related uses around campus sexual assault policies. The UHS/ACHA
survey noted a significant increase in students’ perceived access
to information about the issue, with 82% reporting that they
received information on sexual assault and rape, more than any
other health-related topic and a ten percent increase from 2000.
Murphy
encourages students to build coalitions on campus and work
together to ensure that campus disciplinary policies and
procedures are fair and effective. “At a minimum, students should
create their own data-gathering services, conduct their own annual
surveys and create their own “reports” of discrimination and
harassment on campus,” Murphy suggested.
Sources:
“Women:
Harvard is Violating Our Civil Rights" by Wendy Murphy. [view
article]
“US review
finds no bias in Harvard’s revised policy on Sexual Assault,”
Boston Globe, April 2, 2003.
Survey Finds Depression Pervasive in College,” Harvard Crimson,
March 31, 2003.
[view article]
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Central Park Jogger Goes
Public With Release of Book |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Fourteen
years after she was raped and beaten unconscious in New York
City’s Central Park, 42 year-old Trisha Meili emerged last night
in an interview broadcast on NBC. Meili was a 28 year-old
investment banker at the time of the attack. She suffered brain
damage and has no memory of it, but talks about the trial and
about reliving the trauma this past year after Matias Reyes
confessed to being the lone rapist. The statute of limitations
has expired on Meili’s case, but Reyes is still imprisoned for
previous rape and murder convictions. Five youth convicted of
Meili’s assault were exonerated in December of last year after
having served terms ranging from 7 to 13 years. Meili revealed
her identity for the first time in the interview and in a
memoir of her ordeal and recovery, entitled "I Am the
Central Park Jogger: A Story of Hope and Possibility," scheduled
to be released this week.
Read recent
SATI e-News articles about Matias Reyes and the
exoneration of the five youth
Read more about the
NBC interview
Read more/order
Central Park Jogger book
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Sexual Assault Awareness Month
Recognized Throughout Country |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Hundreds of
events and activities are being held this month in recognition
of Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM). The National Sexual
Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) created a
SAAM calendar, searchable by state, which lists over 150 of
these events.
The NSVRC also has
SAAM posters in both English and Spanish available on their
website that can be downloaded, customized and printed.
Meanwhile at the national level,
a bipartisan
group of United States Senators and Representatives introduced
joint resolutions in the House and Senate to recognize April as
National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month. RAINN
(the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) is heading up a
write-in effort to encourage Congressmen to become cosponsors of
the bill.
More
information on the resolution and where to write at
RAINN's website.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
**Forensic News** |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Request for Assistance in
Assessment on DNA and Convicted Felons |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Smith, Alling, Lane, a Government Affairs Agency, is conducting
an assessment for the Department of Justice. They are seeking
examples in each state of crimes that could have been prevented
if the state had required DNA from all felons.
The following excerpt from a story in Texas illustrates the
point:
Christopher Ted Dye raped
three Austin women in their homes before the police first
arrested him in 1993 for burglarizing a house. Unaware they
had apprehended a serial rapist, authorities released the
34-year-old former auto mechanic on bail.
Over the next six months, Dye raped four more women before
being arrested a second time for burglarizing an apartment.
He served two months in jail. For two more years, as the
police searched for the MoPac rapist, nicknamed that because
the attacks occurred near the expressway, Dye raped seven
more women before finally being caught.
If you have information or a case
you can submit, please contact Lisa Hurst at
lhurst@smithallinglane.com or you can call her at (253)
627-1091 ext. 190
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Reports of NY SANE Program’s
Demise Greatly Exaggerated |
|
| |
|
|
| |
We were alerted to significant
inaccuracies in two Syracuse Post Standard articles
concerning New York SANE programs, which were summarized in
last month’s issue of SATI e-News. While there is
apparently a need for more funding in the Syracuse Rape Crisis
program, it is not true that all programs in New York may be
dismantled as the article implies, according to Kim Oppelt,
Violence Against Women program specialist at the New York
State Division of Criminal Justice Services.
The Post Standard editorial also referred to the Cayuga
program being dismantled. “Again not true,” says Oppelt. In
fact, the Cayuga center was unaware of the article, and may
seek a retraction from the Post Standard.
She concludes, “Hopefully, the articles at least alerted the
community to the issue and money will be raised to help them
further their goals. We have been funding this program for
several years; we had to cut them due to the cuts we received
in VAWA funds. Otherwise, we consider them one of our best.”
^top of
page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
DNA News
From Around the Country |
|
| |
|
|
| |
The following news
summaries in this section are reprinted with permission from the
DNA Legislation & News, published by Smith Alling
Lane.
A man majoring in criminal justice at the University of North
Dakota, who also served as the Vice President of the
Criminal Justice Association, has been charged with four sexual
assaults on campus. The man’s DNA has linked him to at least one
of the assaults. The man is now a suspect in several other
sexual assaults that occurred in the community over the last 18
months.
Source: “Sexual Assault
Cases: Attorney: ‘Always room for error’ in DNA evidence,” Grand
Forks Herald, March 16, 2003.
In Vermont, DNA test of semen taken from a murder victim
exonerated the boyfriend, but the results told investigators it
came from someone closely related to the boyfriend. Subsequent
testing has linked the boyfriend’s father to the crime. The man
was convicted in 1991 of sexual assault on a minor.
Source: “Arrest in death of
18 year-old girl,” The Associated Press State & Local Wire,
March 12, 2003.
Maryland’s first cold hit on the DNA database has
resulted in a 1988 rape conviction. The man submitted a DNA
sample due to a 1989 rape conviction, and was only a few weeks
away from being paroled when the match was made.
Source: “DNA match results in
rape conviction,” The Associated Press State & Local Wire, March
22, 2003.
In Minnesota, a pet bird bit an attacker during a sexual
assault on the victim, apparently drawing blood that authorities
will try to use to convict him. Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office
deputies found what appeared to be blood on the bird’s back
feathers and recovered a sample that they hope contains the
attacker’s DNA. A suspect is in police custody, and a DNA sample
has been drawn from him for comparison.
Source: “”Blood on bird could
tie man to sex assault,” Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN), March
22, 2003.
In Oregon, a total of 85 out of 135 state lab positions
were originally cut by the Legislature, and only about half of
those jobs have been restored . . . County District Attorneys
say they’re stunned by the lack of resources for homicides,
rapes and other major crimes. In a recent murder, the body was
found at 2:30 in the afternoon, but the Portland lab’s forensics
team couldn’t make it until the next day. Instead, a laid-off
state trooper was deputized as a county sheriff for the day to
collect evidence around the teen’s body. 30 hours had passed
before police were able to remove the victim and clear the
scene.
Source: Crime lab too broke
to respond to some crimes,” The Associated Press State & Local
Wire, March 20, 2003.
New Jersey and Texas introduced legislation to
require ASCLD (American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors)
accreditation of crime labs (AB3451 and HB 2703, respectively).
^top of
page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Promising
Practices: Message From the Desk of the SATI Training Director:
Why a DNA Backlog Exists By Joanne Archambault, Founder and Training Director,
Sexual Assault Training & Investigations, with contributions
by Brian Burrit, DNA Criminalist, San Diego Police Department
Forensic Science Unit |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs)
have significantly improved evidence collection and medical care
of the sexual assault victim. But collection of evidence is only
the first step. A rape kit that follows all the appropriate
protocols and contains the proper specimens is useless if the kit
remains unanalyzed. The latest survey by the National Institute of
Justice estimates that evidence kits from 350,000 rapes and other
violent crimes have gone unprocessed. The reality is this is only
the tip of the iceberg since many law enforcement officers have
not been trained to identify sources of biological evidence using
today’s DNA technology. In many instances, victims and law
enforcement will still only seek a forensic sexual assault
examination if there is penile/vaginal penetration and possible
ejaculation. As training and awareness of DNA continues, the need
for additional DNA resources and funding will continue to grow
exponentially. Last month, the Bush administration announced a
commitment of $1 billion in funding over five years to eliminate
the DNA backlog.
In a show which aired last year, Oprah called this backlog “law
enforcement’s dirty little secret,” noting that if the Baltimore
Police Department had simply paid $500 to have a rape kit
processed, a l987 sexual homicide would have been solved years
ago. This assertion makes for an easy sound bite, but it is a
gross oversimplification of the problem, which is much more
complex. It ignores the struggles of police investigators and
criminalists who were forced to navigate the complexities of
developments in DNA science, which though valuable, temporarily
limited the capabilities of the National DNA Databank (CODIS)
due to the inability to compare data analyzed using different
DNA technologies that evolved over the last two decades.
Oversimplifying the issue also ignores the valuable
contributions of leaders such as California Attorney General
Bill Lockyer, who dedicated $50 million in funding to address
his State’s DNA backlog three years ago. Lockyer will be honored
by SATI and
STOPDV at
its annual conference in San Diego later this month.
In addition to the dissemination of inaccurate information, the
fact that a “surprise” of this magnitude is possible is a strong
indicator that we—meaning SART teams— are not collaborating as
well as some might believe. The fact that nurse examiners,
physicians, advocates and survivors could believe that evidence
had been looked at by crime laboratories but that law
enforcement simply kept the results to themselves is surprising
to me, and yet I’ve heard this thought expressed by a number of
experts in the field. Few people have questioned or analyzed the
root of the problem, which helps explain why so few sexual
assault cases have moved forward through the criminal justice
system. It pains me to believe that one would believe this is
law enforcement’s “dirty little secret.”
The fact is many law enforcement officials have struggled to
solve this problem globally, and in their own back yards.
Detectives and prosecutors often pour their hearts and souls
into their cases. In a perfect world we would have unlimited
resources with which to investigate and hold offenders
accountable. Unfortunately, the daily reality is a case of
dwindling budgets and a continuing shortage of resources. The
fact that we would encourage sexual assault survivors to undergo
a forensic exam and then often have to discard the evidence
after the statute of limitations expired knowing the evidence
had never been analyzed was a painful reality for many
investigators and supervisors. As professionals working in the
field of sexual assault, it is critical we understand the
history of the DNA revolution and its impact on the sexual
assault investigation.
The science of DNA testing underwent a major transition in the
mid to late 1990s. The standard for testing changed from RFLP
(restriction fragment length polymorphism) analysis and first
generation PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing (e.g.
DQA1/PM) to the more sophisticated and accurate second
generation PCR tests called STRs (short tandem repeats). Prior
to the implementation of STR testing, many laboratories,
including both casework and databank, performed different tests,
thus often preventing the results of one laboratory being
comparable to the results of another laboratory. As nearly every
DNA laboratory has now adopted the superior STR testing, the
results from a laboratory using STR testing can now be compared
to results generated throughout the country.
Besides the fact that it is less accurate and incompatible with
PCR/STR testing, RFLP testing requires a relatively large amount
of high quality DNA. Therefore, many samples of biological
evidence were either too small or too old for RFLP testing.
Since RFLP testing did not guarantee a result, police sometimes
faced the prospect of losing valuable evidence if they went
forward with testing a limited quantity of biological evidence.
Although most of the recent attention has focused on rape kits,
many sexual assault victims do not report to law enforcement
within the 72-96 hour time frame that would generally warrant a
rape exam. However, many times clothing and other crime scene
evidence may be available. Screening the volume of evidence that
may be available in a sexual assault case is a labor-intensive
process that also competes for limited resources. $500 might be
a minimum estimate for what it costs to process a rape exam, but
it is hardly the average. Depending on the extensiveness of the
evidence and the amount of screening involved, it can cost $800,
$2,000, $5,000 or more.
RFLP was also a labor-intensive process, which means that it is
much more expensive than PCR analysis. As a result, detectives,
and supervisors were forced to make tough and strategic
decisions on individual cases every day, allocating limited
resources among competing investigative units such as Homicide
and Child Abuse in addition to addressing the ongoing needs of
the prosecutor’s office. To assist with this decision making
process, Dr. Patrick O’Donnell, the supervisor of the San Diego
Police Department’s DNA laboratory worked with the SDPD Sex
Crimes Unit to develop several forms to help detectives focus
the investigation and the Criminalist on evidence that would
most likely produce the best forensic results based on the
victim’s history of the assault. The objective is to effectively
manage limited resources by working most efficiently to identify
and analyze evidence. If this is accomplished, the crime lab
findings can be used to build an investigation while reducing
property and evidence storage problems at the same time. Those
forms can be downloaded from the San Diego Police Department’s
web site at
http://www.ci.san-diego.ca.us/police/about/forms.shtml
During this transition, states throughout the country were also
attempting to analyze their offender samples and enter them into
a database for comparison with profiles obtained from crime
scene evidence. Most states had large offender sample backlogs
and the databases were extremely limited. Thus, cases in which
police had a suspect became the priority, in order to either
eliminate a suspect or proceed with prosecution.
To complicate matters even further, some police crime
laboratories, like the San Diego Police Department applied
DQA1/PM techniques until the implementation of STR analysis. The
DQA1/PM tests, however, provided six markers that are not as
discriminating as RFLP or STR markers and the results could not
be entered into the national DNA database. At that time, the
SDPD Sex Crimes Unit generally used the results to confirm or
exclude a suspect. Cases with no leads or possible suspects were
sometimes, although rarely, sent to private laboratories for
RFLP testing when the case met the criteria for sending it on.
These decisions were often based on the type of case and the
value of the DNA evidence.
As many casework and databank laboratories converted to the
superior STR testing, a vast amount of untouched evidence was
now suitable for analysis. California Attorney General Bill
Lockyer was among the first to realize that an influx of new
funding was needed to utilize STR technology in analyzing
evidence in the non-suspect cases that had never been examined.
Lockyer dedicated $50 million in funding which was allocated
among California law enforcement agencies to process thousands
of non-suspect rape kits dating back to January 1, 1995 (those
cases still within the statute of limitations in California at
that time). Besides California’s effort, the National Institute
of Justice has been distributing millions in grants to crime
labs to alleviate the backlog of convicted felon profiles and
crime scene evidence.
While dialogue and action on the DNA backlog has proceeded at a
national level and in some states and jurisdictions, there has
been a breakdown among community-level SARTs about what has been
happening with rape kits. We need to do a better job of
communicating our knowledge and expertise among team members. In
fact, crime labs have been largely absent from SARTs. Few
forensic examiners have received feedback from the criminalist
who may process a kit and other evidence that might be
associated with a sexual assault. This feedback is critical to
our understanding and ongoing evaluation of our policies and
procedures to effectively respond to sexual assault in our
communities. Consider inviting a criminalist from the crime lab
to your next local SART, regional or state meeting to educate
your group about what is going on locally and at the state level
with regard to protocols, prioritization and their own backlog.
In turn, advocates and law enforcement can help put a human face
to the evidence processed by forensic scientists. Be creative in
finding ways to bridge the gaps between each SART members’
expertise. Perhaps eventually it will lead to crime lab
personnel being recognized as an integral part of the Sexual
Assault Response Team.
^top of page^ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
For a list of upcoming
conferences and training events, please view the
Training Schedule. |
|
| |
|
|
|
>Back to
Resources Main Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
