Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-fnl2l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-23T05:29:27.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Police “Couldn't or Wouldn't” Submit Sexual Assault Kits for Forensic DNA Testing: A Focal Concerns Theory Analysis of Untested Rape Kits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Rebecca Campbell  and
Giannina Fehler-Cabral
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In jurisdictions throughout United States, thousands of sexual assault kits (SAKs) (also termed “rape kits”) have not been submitted by the police for forensic DNA testing. DNA evidence may be helpful to sexual assault investigations and prosecutions by identifying offenders, revealing serial offenders through DNA matches across cases, and exonerating those who have been wrongly accused, so it is important to understand why police are not utilizing this evidence. In this study, we applied focal concerns theory to understand discretionary practices in rape kit testing. We conducted a three-year ethnography in one city that had large numbers of untested SAKs—Detroit, Michigan—to understand why thousands of SAKs collected between 1980 and 2009 were never submitted by the police for forensic DNA testing. Drawing upon observational, interview, and archival data, we found that while practical concerns regarding resources available for forensic analysis were clearly a factor, as Detroit did not have the funding or staffing to test all SAKs and investigate all reported rapes, focal concerns regarding victim credibility and victim cooperation were more influential in explaining why rape kits were not tested. Implications for the criminal justice system response to sexual assault and rape kit testing legislation are examined.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 73 - 105
Copyright
© 2018 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The action research project described in this paper was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Justice (2011-DN-BX-0001). The opinions or points of view expressed in this document are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the official positions of any participating organization or the U.S. Department of Justice. The authors thank the members of the action research project and academic colleagues who provided feedback on prior drafts of this manuscript. We also thank Rachael Goodman-Williams for her assistance with the revisions of this paper.

References

Alexander, M. (2012) The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Bernstein, E. (2012) “Carceral Politics as Gender Justice? The “Traffic in Women” and Neoliberal Circuits of Crime, Sex, and Rights,” 41 Theory and Society 233–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonilla-Silva, E. (1997) “Rethinking Racism: Toward a Structural Interpretation,” 62 American Sociological Rev. 465–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bumiller, K. (2009) In an Abusive State: How Neoliberalism Appropriated the Feminist Movement against Sexual Violence. Durham: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Bumiller, K. (2014) “Explaining the Volte-Face: Turning Away from Criminal Law and Returning to the Quest for Gender Equality,” in Gartner, R. & McCarthy, B., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Gender, Sex, and Crime. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. 118–36.Google Scholar
Butler, J. M. (2005) Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers. Waltham: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. (2008) “The Psychological Impact of Rape Victims’ Experiences with the Legal, Medical, and Mental Health Systems,” 68 American Psychologist 702–17.Google Scholar
Campbell, R., Shaw, J., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (Forthcoming) “Evaluation of a Victim-Centered, Trauma-Informed Victim Notification Protocol for Untested Sexual Assault Kits (SAKs),” Violence Against Women.Google Scholar
Campbell, R., Greeson, M. R., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (2013) “With Care and Compassion: Adolescent Sexual Assault Victims’ Experiences in Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Programs,” 9 J. of Forensic Nursing 68–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R., et al. (2008) “A Participatory Evaluation Project to Measure SANE Nursing Practice and Adult Sexual Assault Patients’ Psychological Well-Being,” 4 J. of Forensic Nursing 19–28.Google ScholarPubMed
Campbell, R., et al. (2012) “The Impact of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (Sane) Program Services on Law Enforcement Investigational Practices: A Mediational Analysis,” 39 Criminal Justice & Behavior 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R., et al. (2015a) “Pathways to Help: Adolescent Sexual Assault Victims’ Disclosure and Help-Seeking Experiences,” 21 Violence Against Women 824–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, R., et al. (2015b) The Detroit Sexual Assault Kit (SAK) Action Research Project (ARP), Final Report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Campbell, R., et al. (2017a) “The National Problem of Untested Sexual Assault Kits (SAKs): Scope, Causes, and Future Directions for Research, Policy, and Practice,” 18 Trauma, Violence, & Abuse: A Rev. J. 363–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, R., et al. (2017b) “Forgotten Evidence: A Mixed Methods Study of Why Sexual Assault Kits (SAKs) Are Not Submitted for DNA Forensic Testing,” 41 Law & Human Behavior 454–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Coker, D. & Macquoid, A. (2015) “Why Opposing Hyper-Incarceration Should Be Central to the Work of the Anti-Domestic Violence Movement,” 5 Univ. of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Rev. 585–618.Google Scholar
Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Corrigan, R. (2013) Up Against a Wall: Rape Reform and the Failure of Success. New York: New York Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, K. (1991) “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color,” 43 Stanford Law Rev. 1241–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (2012) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W. & Clark, V. P. (2011) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011) “The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research,” in Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 1–20.Google Scholar
Department of Justice (2013) A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations: Adults & Adolescents, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Department of Justice (2015) Identifying and Preventing Gender Bias in Law Enforcement Response to Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Department of Justice (2016) Investigation of the Baltimore City Police Department. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Du Mont, J. & White, D. (2007) The Uses and Impacts of Medico-Legal Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases: A Global Review. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Du Mont, J. & White, D. (2013) “Barriers to the Effective Use of Medico-Legal Findings in Sexual Assault Cases Worldwide,” 23 Qualitative Health Research 1228–39.Google Scholar
Du Mont, J., White, D., & McGregor, M. J. (2009) “Investigating the Medical Forensic Examination from the Perspectives of Sexually Assaulted Women,” 68 Social Science & Medicine 774–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Du Mont, J., et al. (2014) “Client Satisfaction with Nursing-Led Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Services in Ontario,” 10 J. of Forensic Nursing 122–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmel, N. (2013) Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erickson, F. (1986) “Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching,” in Wittrock, M. C., ed., Handbook of Research on Teaching. London: Macmillan. 119–61.Google Scholar
Estrich, S. (1987) Real Rape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Fehler-Cabral, G., Campbell, R., & Patterson, G. (2011) “Adult Sexual Assault Survivors’ Experiences with Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs),” 26 J. of Interpersonal Violence 3618–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frohmann, L. (1997) “Convictability and Discordant Locales: Reproducing Race, Class, and Gender Ideologies in Prosecutorial Decision Making,” 31 Law & Society Rev. 531–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, B. G. (2007) “Doing Formal Theory,” in Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 97–113.Google Scholar
Greeson, M. R. & Campbell, R. (2011) “Rape Survivors’ Agency within the Legal and Medical Systems,” 35 Psychology of Women Q. 582–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeson, M. R., Campbell, R., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (2016) “Nobody Deserves This:” Adolescent Sexual Assault Victims’ Perceptions of Disbelief and Victim-Blame from Police,” 44 J. of Community Psychology 90–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Human Rights Watch (2009) Testing Justice: The Rape Kit Backlog in Los Angeles City and County. New York: Human Rights Watch.Google Scholar
Human Rights Watch (2010) “I Used to Think the Law Would Protect Me” Illinois's Failure to Test Rape Kits. New York: Human Rights Watch.Google Scholar
Human Rights Watch (2013) Capitol Offense: Police Mishandling Sexual Assault Cases in the District of Columbia. New York: Human Rights Watch.Google Scholar
Jordan, J. (2004) “Beyond Belief? Police, Rape, and Women's Credibility,” 4 Criminal Justice 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyful Heart Foundation (2017) Comprehensive Rape Kit Reform: A Leglislative Handbook. New York: Joyful Heart Foundation.Google Scholar
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,” 12 Victims & Offenders 297–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, K. D. & Campbell, R. (2013) “Moving on or Dropping Out: Police Processing of Adult Sexual Assault Cases,” 23 Women & Criminal Justice 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerstetter, W. (1990) “Gateway to Justice: Police and Prosecutor Response to Sexual Assault Against Women,” 81 J. of Criminal Law & Criminology 267–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lonsway, K. A. & Archambault, J. (2012) “The “Justice Gap” for Sexual Assault Cases: Future Directions of Research and Reform,” 18 Violence Against Women 145–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopez, R. (2017) Dallas State Rep. Wants More Money to Test Rape Kits. WFAA. Available at: http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas-state-rep-wants-more-money-to-test-rape-kits/408336136 (accessed 27 February 2017).Google Scholar
Lovrich, N. P., et al. (2004) National Forensic DNA Study Report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Lynch, M. E., et al. (2008) Truth Machine: The Contentious History of DNA Fingerprinting. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacQueen, K. M., et al. (2008) “Team-Based Codebook Development: Structure, Process, and Agreement,” in Guest, G. & MacQueen, K. M., eds., Handbook for Team-Based Qualitative Research. Lanham: Altamira/Rowman & Littlefield. 119–36.Google Scholar
Martin, P. Y. (2005) Rape Work: Victims, Gender, and Emotions in Organization and Community Context. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Michigan Domestic and Sexual Violence Prevention and Treatment Board (2013) Report of the 400 Project. Washington, DC: Office on Violence Against Women.Google Scholar
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Morabito, M. S., Pattavina, A., & Williams, L. M. (2016) “It All Just Piles Up: Challenges to Victim Credibility Accumulate to Influence Sexual Assault Case Processing,” 31 J. of Interpersonal Violence 2847–66.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. B., Banyard, V. L., & Fennessy, E. D. (2013) “Exploring Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Adult Female Sexual Assault Case Attrition,” 3 Psychology of Violence 172–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, S. B., et al. (2014) “Police Reporting Practices for Sexual Assault Cases in Which “The Victim Does Not Wish to Pursue Charges,” 29 J. of Interpersonal Violence 144–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute of Justice (2010) Solicitation: Strategic Approaches to Sexual Assault Kit (SAK) Evidence: An Action Research Project (SL #000947). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2009) Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Page, A. D. (2008) “Gateway to Reform? Police Implications of Police Officers' Attitudes Towards Rape,” 33 American J. of Criminal Justice 44–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parnis, D. & Du Mont, J. (2006) “Symbolic Power and the Institutional Response to Rape: Uncovering the Cultural Dynamics of a Forensic Technology,” 43 Canadian Rev. of Sociology and Anthropology 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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?,” 11 Victims & Offenders 315–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. (2011a) “The Linkage between Secondary Victimization by Law Enforcement and Rape Case Outcomes,” 26 J. of Interpersonal Violence 328–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, D. (2011b) “The Impact of Detectives’ Manner of Questioning on Rape Victims’ Disclosure,” 17 Violence Against Women 1349–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, D. & Campbell, R. (2010) “Why Rape Survivors Participate in the Criminal Justice System,” 38 J. of Community Psychology 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. & Campbell, R. (2012) “The Problem of Untested Sexual Assault Kits: Why Are Some Kits Never Submitted to a Crime Laboratory? 27 J. of Interpersonal Violence 2259–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, D., Greeson, M. R., & Campbell, R. (2009) “Protect Thyself: Understanding Rape Survivors’ Decisions Not to Seek Help from Social Systems,” 34 Health & Social Work 127–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, M. Q. (2015) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Peterson, J., et al. (2012) Sexual Assault Kit Backlog Study. Washington, DC: The National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Peterson, J. L., et al. (2013) “Effect of Forensic Evidence on Criminal Justice Case Processing,” 58 J. of Forensic Sciences 78–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinchevsky, G. M. (forthcoming) “Criminal Justice Considerations for Unsubmitted and Untested Sexual Assault Kits: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Moving Forward,” Criminal Justice Policy Rev. 1–21.Google Scholar
Quinlan, A., Fogel, C., & Quinlan, E. (2009) “Unmasking Scientific Controversies: Forensic DNA Analysis in Canadian Legal Cases of Sexual Assault,” 28 Canadian Woman Studies 98–107.Google Scholar
Richie, B. (2012) Arrested Justice: Black Women, Violence, and America's Prison Nation. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, M. D. (2010) Police Investigation of Rape: Roadblocks and Solutions. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. & Campbell, R. (2013) “Sexual Assault Kit (SAK) Submission among Adolescent Rape Cases Treated in Forensic Nurse Examiner Programs,” 28 J. of Interpersonal Violence 3400–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, J. L., et al. (2017) “Beyond Surveys and Scales: How Rape Myths Manifest in Sexual Assault Police Records,” 7 Psychology of Violence 602–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidanius, J. & Pratto, F. (2001) Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Spohn, C. & Tellis, K. (2010) “Justice Denied? The Exceptional Clearance of Rape Cases in Los Angeles,” 74 Albany Law Rev. 1379–421.Google Scholar
Spohn, C. & Tellis, K. (2012) “The Criminal Justice System's Response to Sexual Violence,” 18 Violence Against Women 169–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spohn, C., White, C., & Tellis, K. (2014) “Unfounding Sexual Assault: Examining the Decision to Unfound and Identifying False Reports,” 48 Law and Society Rev. 161–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., & Kramer, J. (1998) “The Interaction of Race, Gender, and Age in Criminal Sentencing: The Punishment Cost of Being Young, Black, and Male,” 36 Criminology 763–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strom, K. J. & Hickman, M. J. (2010) “Unanalyzed Evidence in Law-Enforcement Agencies: A National Examination of Forensic Processing in Police Departments. 9 Criminology & Public Policy 381–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tasca, M., et al. (2013) “Police Decision Making in Sexual Assault Cases: Predictors of Suspect Identification and Arrest. 28 J. of Interpersonal Violence 1157–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torrance, H. (2012) “Triangulation, Respondent Validation, and Democratic Participation in Mixed Methods Research,” 6 J. of Mixed Methods Research 111–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentine, J. L., et al. (Forthcoming) “Justice Denied: Low Submission Rates of Sexual Assault Kits and the Predicting Variables,” J. of Interpersonal Violence.Google Scholar
Venema, R. M. (2016) “Police Officer Schema of Sexual Assault Reports: Real Rape, Ambiguous Cases, and False Reports,” 31 J. of Interpersonal Violence 872–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittier, N. (2016) “Carceral and Intersectional Feminism in Congress,” 30 Gender and Society 791–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar