For 35 years, I have worked with victims of sexual assault, as a director of a sexual assault center and previously in law enforcement. Every day, I see the devastation rape causes to victims – young, old, women, men – and their families. The crime of rape leaves a permanent scar.
I have also witnessed the problems of prosecuting rape cases — too little funding for rape kits and exams, under-trained law enforcement and health care personnel, and the difficulty prosecutors have putting together cases. Each step in the process is hard and adds to the victim’s inability to recover from the crime. These are real challenges for all communities, including college communities.
Navigating the legal, law enforcement and health care systems is extraordinarily difficult and dually complex in campus sexual assault. Colleges and universities are governed by federal mandates requiring sexual assaults reported and college notice of them, posted.
The reality is, many victims delay reporting, or elect not to report, sexual assault for very real fear-based reasons, including not being believed, character annihilation and the criminal justice system. History supports those fears as legitimate. Research shows a victim-centered, offender-focused, comprehensive investigation is what supports successful prosecution and ultimately holds offenders accountable. This works best when a victim willingly participates in the process.
There is conflict between federal and state laws requiring victims to report sexual assault. The greater issue remains: How do we create a climate of response, respect, care and competency in all communities, including college campuses, that invokes a sense of trust and confidence for victims to participate willingly in the criminal justice proceeding?
The response to sexual assault on campuses will take significant federal buy-in. Incidents of sexual assault and reporting are at odds by tangled and clashing spirits within the Department of Education, Title IX and the Clery Act, and further muddled by conflicting state law and university policy. It is confusing and overwhelming for all involved.
Congress now recognizes the variables that define each school: some with great financial wealth and political influence, some with sworn police officers and others contracting with private security, and each with special interests and alumni influence. It is not practical to suggest that one answer can effectively meet these considerations. Just as Georgia law requires each judicial circuit to define its sexual-assault response protocol, so it should it be with colleges and universities.
There is, however, a place to begin to ensure colleges demonstrably elevate their response to sexual assault:
• Require sexual-assault investigation training for law enforcement or security.
• Verify every campus has a publicly identified Title IX coordinator trained in sexual assault victimization.
• Require colleges to publicly display their sexual assault response policy and provide 24/7 access to trained advocates and medical-forensic examiners that may include community resources.
• Acknowledge that victims have rights and options and should routinely be informed of them.
While the growing number of campus sexual assaults is alarming, all sexual assault is alarming and worthy of equal reform that is victim-centered and offender-focused and utilizes evidence-based investigative strategies and prosecution. Campus sexual assault holds distinct complexities, and though it may appear fraught with confusion, there is an opportunity for Georgia to navigate the conflict of federal mandates, state law, college policy and victim’s rights.
Convening sexual-assault experts, victims, state representatives, law enforcement, prosecutors and college administrators could prove a powerful forum to educate and to create a statewide system of response, care and services that encourages victims to report incidents and participate in the criminal justice system.
Ann Burdges is CEO of Gwinnett Sexual Assault and Child Advocacy Center.
About the Author
