Discussion List for campus-based and allied personnel working to end gender-based violence on campus.

[""<>]

Thank you Claire for your leadership in making sure we continue this forum for examining vaw  on campus and the diversity of experiences and perspectives on related issues.

I am concerned about leaping to create a new list /forum because of a challenge to a post to this list.   I think different perspectives on these issues helps strengthen our work on campus and in the larger community and want to encourage debate not eliminate it.

I respect Wendy Murphy's position on issues relevant to this list serve as well as those offered by others. I think it is important to hear responses to posts and would welcome hearing more about Michele Bowdler's perspectives on the value of rape.kits.  I understand the concern about some wording in Wendy's post...however there is a lot of information provided beyond those that are important when considering institutional responses to Vaw on campus. 

It would very informative to hear Michelle's position on rape.kits and the specific information that helps shape her position.  All of this information is useful as I consider my own position on these issues including the value of rape kits.

Let's have more information and conversation rather than to create a situation where all information is not available for our consideration.

I welcome feedback to my comments as well.


Best Wishes,

Ellie DiLapi


Elena Marie DiLapi

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----

From: "Kaplan, Claire (cnk2r)" <>
To: "Bernstein, Lauren (LB)" <>, "Bowdler, Michelle D." <>, "" <>
Sent: Tue, Apr 30, 2013 19:00:21 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: New Medical Exam Policies for Victims

Dear Lauren, Michelle, and other list members,
Thanks for your feedback and concern. This is a broad list that addresses
campus concerns, and the membership, addition to us campus staff, includes
a number of researchers, individual faculty working to change the climate
on campus, national speakers and program developers, etc. I agree that it
would be advantageous to create some kind of "split list" platform so that
some emails could go to all members, or others to specifically campus
folks, etc. It's a bit more difficult than one would imagine. Lauren was
involved in starting this process, but I think the best way to really get
going would be to have a phone chat with Holly (I think you volunteered as
well, as did Juliette) to really get going. I've been cleaning up the
list as much as I can, so that may make it a bit easier. Shall we set a
date to Skype or Googlechat?
Thanks,
Claire

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Claire Kaplan, Ph.D.
Director, Sexual & Domestic Violence Services
UVA Women's Center
(434) 982-2774 Voice
(434) 982-2901 Fax

http://www.virginia.edu/womenscenter/sdvs
Follow me on Twitter at @clairskyk


This message and any attachments may contain confidential information, and
is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
confidential message is prohibited. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the
original message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.





On 4/30/13 2:19 PM, "Bernstein, Lauren (LB)"
wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I echo Michelle's concerns. Perhaps there could be some criteria for
>posts as well as a designation in to whom emails will be sent. For
>example, it might be uncomfortable for someone to submit something to the
>entire listserv if s/he is seeking feedback from solely sexual assault
>prevention/education/response professionals working at other colleges and
>universities.
>
>We had some conversation previously about migrating to a different format
>that would allow for some greater moderation and ownership from members.
>I think that it is often challenging for us as professionals working on
>college campuses to find a true "home" to discuss issues and seek
>support, and I see some real potential in this becoming that place. I
>agree with Michelle about the usefulness of the discussions but the need
>for some maintenance of the safety and professional ownership of the
>space.
>
>Claire, I would be happy to take some leadership and ownership with a
>small group once the semester is over to address some of these issues.
>I'm also happy to hear from anyone individually who might want to help me
>in this effort of perhaps creating some moderation guidelines. I know
>that Claire has done some incredible work with this list on top of her
>many duties at UVA and think that by working together we can make this an
>even more useful space and take some burden off of her.
>
>I'm happy to help in any way I can. If you are wanting to be a part of
>this conversation, please feel free to reply to me individually at
>.
>
>My best,
>LB
>
>Lauren (LB) Bernstein, MSW
>Assistant Director for the Respect Program
>Office of Health Promotion
>Emory University
>
>404.727.1514
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bowdler, Michelle D. [mailto:]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 1:19 PM
>To: ;
>Subject: RE: Re:New Medical Exam Policies for Victims
>
>Trigger Warning
>
>Hi:
>
>I am wondering if this list is monitored in anyway? I do not appreciate
>the "semen from three men and a goat" line, as well as many other graphic
>details about rape cases involving injuries. I neglect to see how this
>serves the purpose of this list and I would rather not unsubscribe as the
>Title IX and prevention discussions are very helpful to me.
>
>For the record, I disagree with the author's position on the rape kit
>backlog, but I do not think this listserv is the place to discuss it.
>Happy to do it off line if anyone wants additional information.
>
>Thank you.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [mailto:]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 8:40 AM
>To: ;
>Subject: Re:New Medical Exam Policies for Victims
>
>
>Dear colleagues;
>
>There are many reasons to criticize policies on medical exams as well as
>the overall forensic approach to sexual assault investigations.
>Among other things, 90% of college based sexual assaults involve the
>defense of "consent," which means a forensic examination could uncover
>semen from three men and a goat and the evidence would do nothing to
>elucidate the truth on the only issue legitimately in dispute.
>
>Even worse, forensic efforts often involve the wrongful disclosure of
>irrelevant personal information related to virginity, STDs - medical
>history, etc., which serve to deter victims from reporting the crime and
>participating in any legal or school-based process simply because they
>don't want constitutionally-protected information to be divulged as a
>"cost" of seeking redress/justice.
>
>It is far more important to investigate the PERPETRATOR'S background,
>actions, emails, texts and behavior at the time of the incident (in terms
>of the perpetrator having access to drugs or the components of drugs -
>which means SEARCHING his dorm room or apartment and computer searches,
>etc.) because we know from David Lisak's work that most campus offenders
>commit multiple offenses AND are predatory in nature (i.e., they are
>opportunistic and we know what kinds of circumstances they exploit).
>Victims should be insulated from gratuitous privacy violations and
>useless if not harmful forensic examinations, and schools should focus
>instead on gathering centralized files on accused offenders. Liability
>risks will go down as will incidence rates if schools focus more on
>identifying high risk perpetrators and less on the details of a victim's
>private body parts.
>
>Forensic examinations are hyped as helpful but in 25 years, I can think
>of only one case where a forensic examination in a consent-defense case
>made a difference - and it was only a minor difference. A forensic
>professional who did rape kit testing in Massachusetts told our SANE
>Board that she obtained relevant evidence less than 10% of the time and
>that 90% of the kits were a waste of money. She was quickly silenced but
>she got her point across. Advocacy groups and related programs make a
>lot of money from rape kit testing because government funding
>incentivizes forensic exams.
>
>Consent is not proved or disproved by information uncovered in a rape
>kit, which is why hundreds of thousands of them are stacked up around the
>country. It isn't that states lack sufficient funds to conduct testing,
>it's that the kits contain completely irrelevant information because in
>90% of the cases, the victims KNOW their attacker - which means DNA tests
>aren't needed to solve the crime. When the defense is "consent" none of
>the evidence in the kit matters. But perpetrators and their lawyers LOVE
>gathering and SAVING the kits because they know that many kits will
>contain DNA from a victim's OTHER consensual sex partners, and they will
>use the unique nature of the "crime scene" to argue that "anything in
>there" is fair game. It isn't. And it not only violates common sense but
>also destroys rape-shield laws and cause constitutional harm to victims'
>privacy rights under Lawrence v. Texas.
>
>If cops or forensic professionals gathered the body fluids of suspected
>criminals and kept the test kits for years and years, the ACLU would go
>crazy and demand that the kits be destroyed to prevent against the
>government "storing" such highly personal identifying biological
>material. But because the value of rape kit testing has been the subject
>of intense propaganda campaigns - the public is unaware of how harmful
>forensic testing can be.
>
>I'm not opposed to all testing, but I'd prioritize kits where offenders
>are unknown to victims or where the suspect claims there was no sexual
>activity (though studies show that 50% of rapists leave NO DNA at the
>"crime scene" so we also have to be careful not to create and indulge
>unreasonable expectations). The approach I teach is that while it may be
>appropriate to TAKE samples as soon as possible after an incident, there
>should be NO testing done unless and until a decision is made to test a
>certain bit of biological material to answer a particular question. For
>example, it can be ordered that a test be done to "include or exclude the
>accused suspect." No information will be divulged as to whether any
>OTHER person's DNA is found unless and until it becomes relevant to
>conduct that particular test, but the presumption should always be that
>NO tests are done until someone proves that a particular test to answer a
>particular question is necessary.
>
>This is not the approach to take when the issue involves an assessment of
>whether a victim was drugged or otherwise incapacitated as this
>information is HIGHLY relevant to a fair resolution of whether a victim
>had the capacity to give knowing, intelligent and voluntary consent.
>And because drugs and alcohol dissipate quickly, the testing for drugs
>and alcohol should be done immediately. Rape kits can wait because semen
>can last for days, if not longer, and a victim should be given as much
>time as possible before someone ELSE intrudes into her body - causing
>retraumatization, etc. Test for drugs and alcohol FIRST.
>
>Injuries are important, too; far more important than the presence of
>semen, though the value of such evidence is questionable.
>
>Because of the effects of mainstream porn and the increasingly violent
>activities portrayed as "normal," even the discovery of injuries isn't
>necessarily helpful. Twenty five years ago when I was prosecuting sex
>crimes cases, it was easy to win a case with injuries because juries
>readily believed that no person would consent to behavior that left them
>bleeding. These days, the defense simply argues "she liked it rough,"
>and because a vast majority of mainstream porn involves roughness (and
>worse) this usually false claim is perceived as at least plausible.
>
>Maybe most importantly, it is critical to remember that many forensic
>facilities work a bit too closely with school officials in terms of
>helping to thwart the fair treatment of victims. For example, in one
>recent case at the University of Virginia, a victim who suffered multiple
>vaginal injuries during a drug-induced rape had photographs taken of her
>injuries with the use of dye and catheterization. Dozens of photographs
>were taken and the mother of the victim was told by the nurse at the time
>of the exam (a nurse who just happened also to be employed by U.Va. AND
>was married to the deputy chief prosecutor in the county attorney's
>office that declined to file criminal charges) that the victim suffered
>injuries consistent with sexual assault, but when the school-based
>hearing took place, a different medical report was submitted containing
>contrary information and the dozens of photographs taken with the use of
>dye and catheterization were not shown. When asked by the family AFTER
>the hearing (which favored the perpetrator on the grounds that "there was
>no evidence of injuries") to produce the photographs, U.Va. officials
>said, without explanation, "there are none." The photos just disappeared.
>
>It is SO important to be skeptical consumers of information about
>forensic testing and medical exams - and to ask tough questions about why
>so much money is being wasted on evidence that violates victims'
>privacy needlessly, rarely produces value and chills their participation
>in redress proceedings. There should be a MUCH greater focus on
>offenders. Why not reallocate the money wasted on needless forensic
>testing and spend it developing better policies and procedures to
>identify and STOP predatory offenders.
>
>Wendy Murphy
>New England LawBoston
>
>
>
>________________________________
>
>This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
>the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
>information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
>or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
>prohibited.
>
>If you have received this message in error, please contact
>the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
>original message (including attachments).