Category: Victim-Centered Investigations

PR: ‘We Got Our Man’ Syndrome: Exoneration of Otis Boone Reveals Perils of Victim-Centered Investigations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 25, 2019

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

‘We Got Our Man’ Syndrome: Exoneration of Otis Boone Reveals Perils of Victim-Centered Investigations

WASHINGTON / March 25, 2019 – Last week Otis Boone was exonerated of his 2011 conviction for two cellphone robberies. After seven years behind bars, he was found “not guilty” at retrial. The wrongful conviction arose from flawed eyewitness identification procedures and use of a faulty “victim-centered” investigative methods.

The Ethics Code of the International Association of Chiefs of Police requires police detectives to “ascertain what constitutes evidence and shall present such evidence impartially and without malice.”

But “victim-centered” investigations instruct investigators to start with an initial presumption of guilt (1). The Start By Believing program openly tells detectives to “corroborate the victim’s account;” “minimize the risk of contradiction” among witness statements; and in the case of sexual assault investigations, make sure the sexual encounter does “not look like a consensual sexual experience.”

Such biased and dishonest practices represent an egregious form of police misconduct, notes the Center for Prosecutor Integrity (2).

According to Boone’s attorneys, the police detective ignored requests to interview witnesses who could have provided exculpatory information on Boone’s whereabouts at the time of the robberies (3). This highlights an unwillingness to conduct an impartial investigation.

Boone’s attorneys also highlighted that the detective failed to review prior interviews and information that cast doubt on the reliability of the identification procedure. This reveals the investigator failed to conduct a careful and thorough interview, reaching a premature conclusion of which suspect to prosecute, which has been dubbed the “We Got Our Man” syndrome.

Over 150 scholars and legal experts have endorsed an Open Letter calling for the abandonment of victim-centered practices (4). To date, 45 editorials have been published criticizing victim-centered approaches (5). SAVE recently launched an online petition to Stop Sham ‘Start By Believing’ Investigations (6).

In recent years the U.S. Department of Justice has awarded grants worth millions of dollars to promote Start By Believing methods (6).

Links:

http://www.saveservices.org/camp/sbb/
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/pr/start-by-believing-lawmakers-must-act-swiftly-to-root-out-police-misconduct-and-bias/
https://abc7ny.com/man-who-served-7-years-for-robbery-found-not-guilty-at-retrial/5205671/
http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/VCI-Open-Letter-7.20.18.pdf
http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/investigations/
https://www.change.org/p/congress-stop-sham-start-by-believing-investigations
https://www.evawintl.org/grants.aspx

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Title IX Victim-Centered Investigations

PR: SAVE Calls for Major Reforms to Campus ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date January 1, 2018

Contact: Nasheia Conway

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: nconway@saveservices.org

Following USC ‘motherf—er’ Case, SAVE Calls for Major Reforms to Campus ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

WASHINGTON / January 12, 2018 – Superior Court Judge Elizabeth White recently issued a ruling regarding a sexual assault case in which she concluded the university’s investigative procedures lacked fairness and impartiality. Based on this case and similar ones at other universities, Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is now calling on college administrators to end the practice of using guilt-presuming “victim-centered” investigations.

University of Southern California investigator Patrick Noonan submitted an investigative report that omitted more than 150 pages of communications between the parties. The investigator failed to interview the man’s roommate, despite the accused student’s request. Noonan also organized the numerous text messages in non-chronological order, rendering their meaning difficult to decipher.

Following a subsequent teleconference between the university officials and the accused student and his advisor, neither party hung up the line. Thereupon Noonan and the USC Title IX coordinator chatted between themselves, referring to the male student as a “motherfucker” and commenting that the accuser was “so cute and intelligent.”

The expelled student filed a lawsuit against the university. Not surprisingly, the judge concluded the accused student was a victim of a process that was not “fair, thorough, reliabl[y] neutral, and impartial.” http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/40537/

This week SAVE is releasing a new Special Report, “’Believe the Victim:’ The Transformation of Justice.” The report traces the evolution of the “victim-centered” movement over the past decade and documents its incompatibility with recognized investigative methods that are premised on objectivity, neutrality, and fairness. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/SAVE-Believe-the-Victim.pdf

The report concludes, “Victim advocates’ efforts to assure serious consideration and respectful treatment for complainants are commendable. But demanding that investigators and adjudicators reflexively “believe the victim” places a priority on subjective feelings over objective evidence.”

A previous SAVE report documented how victim-centered investigations represent a liability risk for colleges and universities: http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Victim-Centered-Investigations-and-Liability-Risk.pdf

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) is working for fair and effective solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Sexual Assault Special Report Victim-Centered Investigations

PR: Railroading the Innocent: SAVE Calls on University Administrators to End ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 26, 2016

Contact: Christopher Perry

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: cperry@saveservices.org

Railroading the Innocent: SAVE Calls on University Administrators to End ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

WASHINGTON / October 26, 2016 – A report issued today probes a recent spate of lawsuits against universities, and calls on college administrators to stop the use of so-called “victim-centered” investigations to probe allegations of campus sexual assault. The report concludes such methods are “inconsistent with the most basic notions of fairness, repudiate the presumption of innocence, and are likely to lead to wrongful determinations of guilt, thereby increasing schools’ liability exposure.”

Titled “Victim-Centered Investigations: New Liability Risk for Colleges and Universities,” the report analyses 18 lawsuits filed by students who had been accused of sexual misconduct, and in which the judge ruled in favor of the accused student. In all 18 cases, students alleged the university committed investigational improprieties. The paper classifies the investigational flaws into categories such as “Incomplete/Inadequate Collection of Evidence” and “Overt Bias/Predetermination of Guilt.” (1)

The report also highlights the recent Office for Civil Rights determination against Wesley College of Delaware. According to the OCR, the college did not conduct any meaningful investigation of the accused student’s perspective. The Washington Post concluded, “In this case, the OCR found virtually everything wrong and therefore, a violation of Title IX’s protections against discrimination.”

“Victim-centered” methods abandon traditional notions of impartiality and objectivity. They instead call on investigators to presume that “all sexual assault cases are valid unless established otherwise by investigative findings” (2). Harvard Law School professor Jeannie Suk describes the victim-centered concept as an extreme “near-religious teaching” that is likely to discredit future rape victims (3). An Expert Panel composed of attorneys and professional investigators recently rejected “victim-centered” methods, calling for them to be replaced by “justice-centered” approaches (4).

SAVE has developed a model bill titled the Campus Equality, Fairness, and Transparency Act (CEFTA). The bill mandates the use of “justice-centered” investigations that would require campus investigators to “discharge their duties with objectivity and impartiality” (5). More information about victim-centered investigations is available (6).

Citations:

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) is working for effective and fair solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Discrimination Domestic Violence Press Release Research VAWA Inclusion Mandate Victim-Centered Investigations Victims Violence Against Women Act

PR: SAVE Encourages Domestic Violence Groups to Warn At-Risk Victims

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 29, 2013

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

SAVE Encourages Domestic Violence Groups to Warn At-Risk Victims

WASHINGTON / October 29, 2013 – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a leading domestic violence advocacy group, is urging anti-abuse service organizations to update their websites and training materials so persons at high risk of partner violence are warned to take necessary protective measures.

SAVE has identified three risk factors that dramatically multiply a person’s chance of injury and death:

Separated: Persons who are separated face a risk of partner violence that is 50 times higher than the rate of married individuals: Married: 0.9/1,000. Separated: 49.0/1,000.
Mutual violence: A CDC survey found that injury is more than twice as likely when the violence is mutual — 28.4% — compared to unidirectional violence — 11.6%.
Female-initiated violence: Female initiation of violence is the leading reason for the woman becoming injured by her partner, according to research by Dr. Sandra Stith.

A review of existing online Fact Sheets reveals some groups, such as the New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, do warn persons about the first risk factor.

But SAVE’s analysis has failed to identify a single group that is warning persons about the risks of mutual or female-initiated violence. As a result, at-risk persons do not take special precautions to deter violence. And policymakers may be unaware of the need for programs designed to address these worrisome situations.

To date, SAVE has reviewed Fact Sheets produced by the National Network to End Domestic Violence, Futures Without Violence, New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, NY City Mayor’s Office to Combat Domestic Violence, and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. SAVE evaluated their statements according to 10 objective criteria of accuracy, balance, and completeness: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/truth/

In the future, SAVE plans to review the educational materials of other organizations

“SAVE applauds the work of domestic violence groups that warn persons about the risks of separating from an abusive partner,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “But why aren’t these groups also highlighting the risks of mutual and female-initiated abuse?”

Each year, approximately 1,200 Americans were killed by their intimate partners.

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org