The Bureaucratic Burden of Identifying your Rapist and Remaining “Cooperative”: What the Sexual Assault Kit Initiative Tells us about Sexual Assault Case Attrition and Outcomes

Abstract

We analyzed a large sample of sexual assaults over almost two decades in one urban U.S. jurisdiction with previously untested sexual assault kits that were initially not successfully adjudicated (n = 717). We explored patterns of attrition through descriptive statistics and predictors of attrition through continuation-ratio modeling. Findings provide a more comprehensive framework for examining attrition, exploring the bureaucratic burden placed on victims to identify who sexually assaulted them and to remain engaged in an often harmful process and system. Implications suggest this burden could be eased via increased trauma-informed victim support and protocols and increased use of forensic evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Availability of Data and Material

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. 1.

    We coded in waves based on sequential grant awards. Wave 1 and 2 include all SAK cases that, as of August 2015, had either been indicted or closed due to insufficient evidence by the Task Force (n = 428). Wave 3 includes a random sample of SAK cases (n = 293) that, from September 2015 to September 2016, had either been indicted or closed due to insufficient evidence—capturing more currently investigated cases by the Task Force.

  2. 2.

    We should note that with these incident reports, “date of the report” is actually the date the report was typed up, not necessarily the date the report was actually made; however, most reports were typed up either the same day or the next.

  3. 3.

    Previous research on a pilot sample these data suggests that it is likely that at least some portion of these cases had some form of investigative follow up that was not contained in the files available to us and/or were not complete administrative files. However, we could only code what was provided to us according to our sampling frame.

References

  1. Addington, L. A., & Rennison, C. M. (2008). Rape co-occurrence: Do additional crimes affect victim reporting and police clearance of rape? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 24(2), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-008-9043-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Advancing Criminal Investigatory Practice, Wash. Stat. Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2318, Sec. 8 (2019-2020). https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2318&Year=2019&Initiative=False.

  3. Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Albonetti, C. A. (1986). Criminality, prosecutorial screening, and uncertainty: Toward a theory of discretionary decision making in felony case processings. Criminology, 24(4), 623–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alderden, M. A., & Ullman, S. E. (2012). Creating a more complete and current picture: Examining police and prosecutor decision-making when processing sexual assault case. Violence Against Women, 18(5), 525–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212453867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Atassi, L. (2014). Cleveland police brass respond to recommendations from national police research and policy organization. https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2014/05/cleveland_police_brass_respond.html. Accessed 8 January 2020.

  7. Atassi, L., Dissell, R., & Baird, G. (2011). Cleveland police aren't following departmental rules in clearing rape cases, analysis shows. https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2011/01/cleveland_police_arent_followi.html. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  8. Backes, B. (2014). Taking on the challenge of unsubmitted sexual assault kits [Webinar]. https://www.innovations.harvard.edu/taking-challenge-unsubmitted-sexual-assault-kits-recording. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  9. Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2005). Prosecutorial charging decisions in sexual assault cases: Examining the impact of a specialized prosecution unit. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16(4), 461–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403405277195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2012). Modeling the effects of victim behavior and moral character on prosecutor's charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Violence and Victims, 27(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.27.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bouffard, J. A. (2000). Predicting type of sexual assault case closure from victim, suspect, and case characteristics. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(6), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352(00)00068-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown, J. M., Hamilton, C., & O'Neill, D. (2007). Characteristics associated with rape attrition and the role played by scepticism or legal rationality by investigators and prosecutors. Psychology, Crime & Law, 13(4), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160601060507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Campbell, B. A., Lapsey, D. S., & Wells, W. (2019). An evaluation of Kentucky’s sexual assault investigator training: Results from a randomized three-group experiment. Journal of Experimental Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09391-0.

  14. Campbell, R. (1998). The community response to rape: Victims' experiences with the legal, medical, and mental health systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(3), 355–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Campbell, R. (2008). The psychological impact of rape victims' experiences with the legal, medical, and mental health systems. American Psychologist, 63(8), 702–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Campbell, R., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (2018). Why police “couldn’t or wouldn’t” submit sexual assault kits for forensic DNA testing: A focal concerns theory analysis of untested rape kits. Law & Society Review, 52, 73–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Campbell, R., Fehler-Cabral, G., Bybee, D., & Shaw, J. (2017). Forgotten evidence: A mixed methods study of why sexual assault kits (SAKs) are not submitted for DNA forensic testing. Law and Human Behavior, 41(5), 454–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/LHB0000252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Campbell, R., Fehler-Cabral, G., Pierce, J., Sharma, D. B., Bybee, D., Shaw, J., et al. (2015). The Detroit sexual assault kit (SAK) action research project (ARP), final report. Washington, DC: National Criminal Justice Reference Center.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Campbell, R., Patterson, D., Bybee, D., & Dworkin, E. (2009). Predicting sexual assault prosecution outcomes: The role of medical forensic evidence collected by sexual assault nurse examiners. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(7), 712–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809335054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Campbell, R., Patterson, D., & Lichty, L. F. (2005). The effectiveness of sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) programs: A review of psychological, medical, legal, and community outcomes. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 6, 313–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Craig, E. (2016). The inhospitable court. University of Toronto Law Journal, 66(2), 197–243. https://doi.org/10.3138/UTLJ.3398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. De Vries, H., Elliott, M. N., Kanouse, D. E., & Teleki, S. S. (2008). Using pooled kappa to summarize interrater agreement across many items. Field Methods, 20(3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X08317166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dissell, R. (2012, March 31). Sex-crimes, missing-person policies revised; issues remain. The Plain Dealer.

  24. Du Mont, J., & Myhr, T. L. (2000). So few convictions. Violence Against Women, 6(10), 1109–1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010022183541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fallik, S., & Wells, W. (2015). Testing previously unsubmitted sexual assault kits: What are the investigative results? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26, 598–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. FBI. (2013). Criminal justice information services (CJIS) division uniform crime reporting (UCR) program. Summary Reproting System (SRS) user manual, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/summary-reporting-system-srs-user-manual. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  27. Fenton, J. (2010, Jun 27). City rape statistics, investigations draw concern. The Baltimore Sun. https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-md-ci-rapes-20100519-story.html. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  28. Frohmann, L. (1991). Discrediting victims' allegations of sexual assault: Prosecutorial accounts of case rejections. Social Problems, 38(2), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.2307/800530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Frohmann, L. (1998). Constituting power in sexual assault cases: Prosecutorial strategies for victim management. Social Problems, 45(3), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.2307/3097193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hohl, K., & Stanko, E. A. (2015). Complaints of rape and the criminal justice system: Fresh evidence on the attrition problem in England and Wales. European Journal of Criminology, 12(3), 324–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370815571949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Holleran, D., Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2010). Examining charging agreement between police and prosecutors in rape cases. Crime & Delinquency, 56(3), 385–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707308977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hosmer, D., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. (2013). Applied logistic regression (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Irving, T. (2008). Decoding black women: Policing practices and rape prosecution on the streets of Philadelphia. NWSA Journal, 20(2), 100–120.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Johnson, D., Peterson, J., Sommers, I., & Baskin, D. (2012). Use of forensic science in investigating crimes of sexual violence: Contrasting its theoretical potential with empirical realities. Violence Against Women, 18(2), 193–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212440157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Jordan, C. E. (2004a). Intimate partner violence and the justice system. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(12), 1412–1434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260504269697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jordan, J. (2004b). Beyond belief? Police, rape and women's credibility. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 4(1), 29–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466802504042222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaiser, K. A., O’Neal, E. N., & Spohn, C. (2017). “Victim refuses to cooperate”: A focal concerns analysis of victim cooperation in sexual assault cases. Victims & Offenders, 12(2), 297–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2015.1078864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kelley, K. D., & Campbell, R. (2013). Moving on or dropping out: Police processing of adult sexual assault cases. Women & Criminal Justice, 23(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2013.743365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kingsnorth, R. F., & Macintosh, R. C. (2004). Domestic violence: Predictors of victim support for official action. Justice Quarterly, 21(2), 301–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kingsnorth, R. F., MacIntosh, R. C., & Wentworth, J. (1999). Sexual assault: The role of prior relationship and victim characteristics in case processing. Justice Quarterly, 16(2), 275–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829900094141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. LaFree, G. D. (1989). Rape and criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lievore, D. (2004). Victim credibility in adult sexual assault cases. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice (Vol. 288). Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.

  43. Lonsway, K. A., & Archambault, J. (2012). The “justice gap” for sexual assault cases: Future directions for research and reform. Violence Against Women, 18(2), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212440017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Louisana Inspector General. (2014a). A performance audit of the New Orleans police department's Uniform Crime Reporting of forcible rapes. (A&R13PAU002). http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/11/12/noaudit.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  45. Louisana Inspector General. (2014b). Report of Inquiry into documentation of sex crime investigations by five detectives in the special victims section of the New Orleans police department. (13–0071-I). http://nolaoig.gov/index.php?option=com_mtree&task=att_download&link_id=4&cf_id=37. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  46. Lovell, R., Luminais, M., Flannery, DJ., Overman, L., Huang, D., Walker, T., Clark, D. R. (2017). Offending patterns for serial sex offenders identified via the DNA testing of previously unsubmitted sexual assault kits. Journal of Criminal Justice 52:68–78.

  47. Lovell, R., Luminais, M., Flannery, D. J., Bell, R., & Kyker, B. (2018). Describing the process and quantifying the outcomes of the Cuyahoga County sexual assault kit initiative. Journal of Criminal Justice, 57, 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2018.05.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lovell, R., Huang, W., Overman, L., Flannery, D., & Klingenstein, J. (2020). Offending histories and typologies of suspected sexual offenders identified via untested sexual assault kits. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(4), 470–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854819896385.

  49. Luminais, M., Lovell, R., & Flannery, D. (2017). Perceptions of why the sexual assault kit backlog exists in Cuyahoga County, Ohio and recommendations for improving practice. Cleveland, OH: Begun Center for Violence Prevention Research and Education at the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences at Case Western Reserve University. https://digital.case.edu/islandora/object/ksl:2006061457. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  50. Luminais, M., Lovell, R., McGuire, M., Klingenstein, J., Kavadas, A., & Overman, L. (2020). Victim advocates and cold case investigations: Impact of integration on the Cuyahoga County sexual assault kit task force. The begun Center for Violence Prevention Education and Research at the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences at Case Western Reserve University.

  51. Maryland Coalition against Sexual Assault. (2011). Baltimore City Sexual Assault Response Team annual report. http://www.ncdsv.org/images/MCASA_BaltimoreCitySARTAnnualReport_October2011.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  52. McCahill, T. W., Meyer, L. C., & Fischman, A. M. (1979). The aftermath of rape. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  53. McLaren, J. A., Henson, V., & Stone, W. E. (2009). The sexual assault nurse examiner and the successful sexual assault prosecution. Women & Criminal Justice, 19(2), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974450902791302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. McLean, R., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2008). The influence of relationship and physical evidence on police decision-making in sexual assault cases. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 40(2), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/00450610802452210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Morabito, M. S., Pattavina, A., & Williams, L. M. (2017). Active representation and police response to sexual assault complaints. Journal of Crime and Justice, 40(1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2016.1216730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Morabito, M. S., Pattavina, A., & Williams, L. M. (2019). It all just piles up: Challenges to victim credibility accumulate to influence sexual assault case processing. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(15), 3151–3170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516669164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Morabito, M. S., Williams, L. M., & Pattavina, A. (2019). Decision making in sexual assault cases: Replication research on sexual violence case attrition in the United States, 2006–2012. Washington DC: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252689.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  58. Morgan, R., and Oudekerk, B. (2019). Criminal victimization, 2018. NCJ 253043. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf. Accessed 9 September 2020.

  59. Murphy, S. B., Edwards, K. M., Bennett, S., Bibeau, S. J., & Sichelstiel, J. (2014). Police reporting practices for sexual assault cases in which “the victim does not wish to pursue charges”. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(1), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513504648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. O'Neal, E. N., Tellis, K., & Spohn, C. (2015). Prosecuting intimate partner sexual assault: Legal and extra-legal factors that influence charging decisions. Violence Against Women, 21(10), 1237–1258. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801215591630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Page, A. D. (2007). Behind the blue line: Investigating police officers’ attitudes toward rape. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 22(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-007-9002-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Page, A. D. (2008). Gateway to reform? Policy implications of police officers’ attitudes toward rape. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-007-9024-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Pattavina, A., Morabito, M., & Williams, L. M. (2016). Examining connections between the police and prosecution in sexual assault case processing: Does the use of exceptional clearance facilitate a downstream orientation? Victims & Offenders, 11(2), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2015.1046622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Pinchevsky, G. M. (2018). Criminal justice considerations for unsubmitted and untested sexual assault kits: A review of the literature and suggestions for moving forward. Criminal justice policy review, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403416662899.

  65. Quinlan, A. (2016). Suspect survivors: Police investigation practices in sexual assault cases in Ontario, Canada. Women & Criminal Justice, 26(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2015.1124823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Rennison, C. M. (2001). Criminal victimization 2000, changes 1993–2000 with trends 1993–2000. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv01.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  67. Ross, A. (2020, January 5). How the Pinellas sheriff's office boosts its rape stats without solving cases. Tampa Bay Times. https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2020/01/05/how-the-pinellas-sheriffs-office-boosts-its-rape-stats-without-solving-cases/. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  68. Shaw, J., Campbell, R., Cain, D., & Feeney, H. (2017). Beyond surveys and scales: How rape myths manifest in sexual assault police records. Psychology of Violence, 7(4), 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/VIO0000072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sleath, E., & Bull, R. (2017). Police perceptions of rape victims and the impact on case decision making: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, 102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AVB.2017.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Smith, C. P., & Freyd, J. J. (2014). Institutional betrayal. American Psychologist, 69(6), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Spears, J. W., & Spohn, C. C. (1996). The genuine victim and prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 20(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02886925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Spears, J. W., & Spohn, C. C. (1997). The effect of evidence factors and victim characteristics on prosecutors' charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Justice Quarterly, 14(3), 501–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829700093451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Spohn, C., Beichner, D., & Davis-Frenzel, E. (2001). Prosecutorial justifications for sexual assault case rejection: Guarding the "gateway to justice". Social Problems, 48(2), 206–235. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2001.48.2.206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Spohn, C., Beichner, D., Davis-Frenzel, E., & Holleran, D. (2001). Prosecutors' charging desicions in sexual assault cases: A multi-site study, final report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/197048.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  75. Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2001). Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of charging decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and intimate partners. Justice Quarterly, 18(3), 651–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100095051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Spohn, C., & Tellis, K. (2010). Justice denied: The exceptional clearance of rape cases in Los Angeles. Albany Law Review, 74(3), 1379–1422.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Spohn, C., & Tellis, K. (2012). The criminal justice system's response to sexual violence. Violence Against Women, 18(2), 169–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Spohn, C., & Tellis, K. (2014). Policing and prosecuting sexual assault: Inside the criminal justice system. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Spohn, C., & Tellis, K. (2018). Sexual assault case outcomes: Disentangling the overlapping decisions of police and prosecutors. Justice Quarterly, 36, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2018.1429645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Spohn, C., White, C., & Tellis, K. (2014). Unfounding sexual assault: Examining the decision to unfound and identifying false reports. Law and Society Review, 48(1), 161–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Strom, K. J., Roper-Miller, J., Jones, S., Sikes, N., Pope, M., & Horstmann, N. (2009). Survey of law enforcement forensic evidence processing 2007, final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228415.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  82. Tasca, M., Rodriguez, N., Spohn, C., & Koss, M. P. (2013). Police decision making in sexual assault cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(6), 1157–1177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512468233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Taylor, S. C., & Gassner, L. (2010). Stemming the flow: Challenges for policing adult sexual assault with regard to attrition rates and under-reporting of sexual offences. Police Practice and Research, 11(3), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614260902830153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Tellis, K. M., & Spohn, C. C. (2008). The sexual stratification hypothesis revisited: Testing assumptions about simple versus aggravated rape. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(3), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2008.04.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. The White House. (2015). Fact sheet: Investments to reduce the national rape kit backlog and combat violence against women. Washington, DC: The White House.

    Google Scholar 

  86. United States Department of Justice. (2011). Investigation of the New Orleans police department. Washington, DC. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/03/17/nopd_report.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  87. Valliere, V. (2020). Understanding victims of interpersonal violence: A guide for investigators and prosecutors. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Walfield, S. M. (2016). When a cleared rape is not cleared: A multilevel study of arrest and exceptional clearance. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(9), 1767–1792. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515569062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Women’s Law Project. (2013). Advocacy to improve police response to sex crimes. https://www.womenslawproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Policy_Brief_Improving_Police_Response_to_Sexual_Assault.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2020.

  90. Yeung, B., Greenblatt, M., Fahey, M., & Harris, E. (2018). When it comes to rape, just because a case is cleared doesn't mean it's solved. https://www.propublica.org/article/when-it-comes-to-rape-just-because-a-case-is-cleared-does-not-mean-solved. Accessed June 22 2020.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We first want to thank all of the survivors, who inadvertently shared with us their stories of intimate trauma. We’ve read your stories and promise to do our best to make sure they no longer remain shelved. We would also like to thank the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office and the Task Force for inviting us to sit at your table. Without your support, this project would not have happened. Thanks to all members of the research team for your hard work and dedication, Rachel Dissell for the numerous framing conversations, our SAK research colleagues and collaborators, and the anonymous reviewers who provided helpful feedback.

Funding

This work was supported in part by the Bureau of Justice Assistance under Grant Nos. 2015-AK-BX-K009, 2016-AK-BX-K016, and 2018-AK-BX-0001 and a pilot research grant from the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office for Victims of Crime, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel Lovell.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts or Competing Interests

We have no conflicts or competing interests to disclose.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lovell, R., Overman, L., Huang, D. et al. The Bureaucratic Burden of Identifying your Rapist and Remaining “Cooperative”: What the Sexual Assault Kit Initiative Tells us about Sexual Assault Case Attrition and Outcomes. Am J Crim Just (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09573-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sexual assault
  • Case attrition
  • Case outcome
  • Sexual assault kit
  • Rape kit
  • Bureaucratic burden