Jessica Duncan , Emma C. Lathan , Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling , James Tres Stefurak
{"title":"Rape by any other name… Comparing sexual assault cases labeled “suspicious circumstances” to those labeled sex crimes","authors":"Jessica Duncan , Emma C. Lathan , Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling , James Tres Stefurak","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2024.102324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In sexual assault cases, the presence of victim- and case-level factors that align with rape myth beliefs are thought to influence law enforcement perceptions of victim credibility, which in turn, can predict case progression. This study examined the case narratives and investigative outcomes of 200 randomly sampled cases attached to unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) to compare the frequency of factors found to negatively influence officers' perceptions of victim credibility in cases originally labeled “suspicious circumstances” versus sex crimes. SAKs were submitted for forensic testing, and outcomes were compared between groups. Compared to cases labeled sex crimes, “suspicious circumstances” case narratives were 1.5 times more likely to contain statements indicative of a negative view of the victim's credibility (Exp(B) = 1.490; 95 %CI = 1.267–1.752; <em>p</em> = .000) (i.e., the victim engaged in risky behavior, provided inconsistent statements, was unable to provide details in their report of the crime, and had a criminal record, a history of promiscuity, or low intellectual ability). Yet, case label was not predictive of receiving a forensic DNA match (Exp(B) = 1.017; 95 %CI = 0.753–1.374; <em>p</em> = .91). Findings support policy and procedure changes, including routinely testing all SAKs and eliminating the “suspicious circumstances” label, to prevent victim credibility biases from influencing sexual assault case decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48272,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Justice","volume":"96 ","pages":"Article 102324"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235224001739","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In sexual assault cases, the presence of victim- and case-level factors that align with rape myth beliefs are thought to influence law enforcement perceptions of victim credibility, which in turn, can predict case progression. This study examined the case narratives and investigative outcomes of 200 randomly sampled cases attached to unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) to compare the frequency of factors found to negatively influence officers' perceptions of victim credibility in cases originally labeled “suspicious circumstances” versus sex crimes. SAKs were submitted for forensic testing, and outcomes were compared between groups. Compared to cases labeled sex crimes, “suspicious circumstances” case narratives were 1.5 times more likely to contain statements indicative of a negative view of the victim's credibility (Exp(B) = 1.490; 95 %CI = 1.267–1.752; p = .000) (i.e., the victim engaged in risky behavior, provided inconsistent statements, was unable to provide details in their report of the crime, and had a criminal record, a history of promiscuity, or low intellectual ability). Yet, case label was not predictive of receiving a forensic DNA match (Exp(B) = 1.017; 95 %CI = 0.753–1.374; p = .91). Findings support policy and procedure changes, including routinely testing all SAKs and eliminating the “suspicious circumstances” label, to prevent victim credibility biases from influencing sexual assault case decisions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Criminal Justice is an international journal intended to fill the present need for the dissemination of new information, ideas and methods, to both practitioners and academicians in the criminal justice area. The Journal is concerned with all aspects of the criminal justice system in terms of their relationships to each other. Although materials are presented relating to crime and the individual elements of the criminal justice system, the emphasis of the Journal is to tie together the functioning of these elements and to illustrate the effects of their interactions. Articles that reflect the application of new disciplines or analytical methodologies to the problems of criminal justice are of special interest.
Since the purpose of the Journal is to provide a forum for the dissemination of new ideas, new information, and the application of new methods to the problems and functions of the criminal justice system, the Journal emphasizes innovation and creative thought of the highest quality.