This event is sponsored by Napa County Alliance for Senior Education (NCASE), and affiliated with Napa Valley College. The event will be held at Napa Valley College Performing Arts Center. All are invited and there is no charge. This will be the second annual Elder Abuse Awareness Symposium. On June 15, registration will take place from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. The program will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., and the focus will be on elder abuse education and resources. Food trucks will be available. There will be speakers representing the Napa County District Attorneys’ Office, Mental Health, Adult Protective Services, In Home Supportive Services, as well as two special guests: Jan Breslauer, whose mother’s home was taken by a caregiver, and Jane Anderson, a member of AEquitas, The Prosecutors’ Resource on Violence Against Women.

The mistrial does not signal an end to Cosby’s legal woes. Immediately after Judge O’Neill declared a mistrial, Montgomery County district attorney Kevin Steele announced that his office would retry Cosby on the same charges. Furthermore, the prosecution’s doggedness has led some victims’ advocates to say the trial could encourage more victims of sexual assault to come forward. “Anyone who is in the position of having been victimized in a sexual violence case is going to feel encouraged by a guilty verdict and discouraged by a not guilty verdict,” said Teresa Garvey, a retired New Jersey prosecutor and an adviser to AEquitas, a group that assists prosecutors who are trying sex crimes. “But what I also saw on this case was a prosecution team that really went the last mile to support this victim.”

 

Prosecutors fought hard to keep the defense from interrogating Constand’s background, under Pennsylvania’s rape shield law, and called an expert who testified that Constand’s behavior after the alleged assault – her inconsistent memory, her delay in speaking to police – could be explained by the trauma of being assaulted. They also called a toxicologist to corroborate Constand’s testimony about the effects of the pills that Cosby gave her. “All of that evidence takes some of the burden off any victim that comes forward,” said Garvey. “When you know this is how your case is going to be handled – that the case is not going to rest entirely on your shoulders, it’s not going to be just a he-said, she-said – I think that’s going to be very encouraging for victims.”

Once a woman agrees to having sex, her partner can legally ignore her if she says she’d like to stop. At least, that’s the case in North Carolina, where the state Supreme Court ruled that women cannot revoke consent after sexual intercourse begins. [ . . . ] In states where the law does not specify either way, says AEquitas CEO Jennifer Long, most courts read the law to mean that consent can be withdrawn. “Realistically, it’s because it’s sort of something that should be common sense: that you consent until you don’t consent,” she said.

This case is making headlines not only because of the people involved, but because of how unusual this type of lawsuit is. According to Jane Anderson, attorney advisor for AEquitas: The Prosecutors’ Resource on Violence Against Women, this kind of case wouldn’t set a legal precedent but it can send a “bigger, broader message about groping.” This is significant because many victims who experience groping, verbal harassment, and inappropriate touch don’t feel empowered to pursue legal action, says Laura Palumbo, communications director at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.

 

As for the $1, Anderson says a person might sue for such a small amount of damages because the defense team often argues that a person is suing for money. “By suing for so little money, you’re probably trying to quash that narrative and make that completely unlikely,” she says.

Kurland left his position as chief deputy district attorney in August to start work as an attorney adviser with the Washington-based advocacy group AEquitas. The nonprofit serves as a resource for prosecutors nationwide, providing technical assistance, training and research on best practices for cases involving intimate partner violence, sexual assault and human trafficking. Kurland, 45, is joining a team of six attorneys who travel the world to conduct trainings. And when he’s not traveling, Kurland said he’ll be busy researching issues and designing courses from home. The organization is proactive when it comes to technology, so Kurland said he and his family will be able to stay in Berks, where they’ve built their home and life.

 

Kurland made strong connections with AEquitas while working on the case against Jose Olivo, who was convicted of sexually assaulting a young girl. The case was stalled for several years over appeals regarding the use of expert testimony about the ways victims respond to sexual abuse. It was one of the first cases in the state to make that request and Kurland said was ultimately the one that helped get the statute blessed by the Superior Court. He’s now looking forward to helping other prosecutors in similar circumstances. “What I always liked from AEquitas is that it sort of kept me going,” he said. “It can be a tough job and burnout can be high, but when I would go to trainings conducted by AEquitas, it would inspire me to look for better practices here in Berks County. “And if I can help do that for people in prosecutors’ offices across the nation, then that’s pretty rewarding.”

Although there’s an argument to be made that going to the press before the cops can reduce a person’s credibility in front of a jury, Jane Anderson, an attorney advisor at AEquitas…said stories with large numbers of sources help shift public opinion about how victims behave. The idea is that if regular people learn through exposure in the press and pop culture that victims are frequently too intimidated to speak with police right after an incident, they might ultimately serve as jurors who are sympathetic to the idea that victims came forward years or decades later.

 

Anderson added that by speaking out in significant numbers, victims can also make others who have blocked out their abuse realize that they aren’t crazy—and come forward with their own secrets. “Trauma tricks your brain into thinking the trauma wasn’t as serious as it was or that an assault didn’t happen,” Anderson told me. “If someone else says it happened to them, it validates what they experienced. The [efficacy] of crowdsourcing makes sense to me.”

Lost among the broader discussion of horrific misbehavior by powerful individuals is the long-term impact on their victims: diminished mental health, destroyed careers and problems trusting other people in their interpersonal relationships.

 

“Every individual is different,” says Jennifer G. Long, CEO of AEquitas. “Victims have varied responses. Some individuals withdraw from their personal and professional lives. … On the other hand, other individuals you may find throw themselves fiercely into their professional work. They may overachieve and show no outward signs that they’ve suffered.”

Since the 1991 Supreme Court case Payne v. Tennessee, the right of victims to deliver impact statements in front of the court has been widely recognized. But rarely does the public get to see those statements delivered.

 

“Victims testify every day in every courtroom about the harms they have suffered at the hands of perpetrators,” said Jennifer Gentile Long, CEO of AEquitas: The Prosecutors’ Resource on Violence Against Women. “In many ways the proceedings [over the past week] gave a voice to all of those victims.”

Jennifer Long serves as the Chief Executive Officer of AEquitas, a Washington-based firm that assists prosecutors with cases involving allegations of sex crimes, gender-based violence, and human trafficking. Ms. Long, who did not comment specifically on the Rose case, says she tends to favor robust privacy protections to shield victims from the public eye, as long as defendants retain their Sixth Amendment right to confront their accusers. “I can’t think of a compelling public interest to have a victim’s identity known, but that doesn’t mean that one couldn’t arise, given the right circumstances and set of facts,” Long tells the Monitor. “It’s so fact-specific.”

For victims who decide to report sexual harassment or assault at work, outcomes can be unclear. Every case is different. Workplace policies are different. Law is different by state. Some might be handled within the company. Some might need police involvement. Some might be brought to court, with civil and/or criminal implications. Lawyers say how victims report the harassment or assault matters greatly. If someone has forced you to have sex or perform sexual acts, that person likely faces criminal charges, said Jennifer Long, Chief Executive Officer of AEquitas: The Prosecutors’ Resource on Violence Against Women. Same goes for anyone who has touched your breast, butt or genitals, undressed you or undressed in front of you without your permission. Some incidents might fall into civil cases, usually meaning victims are entitled to financial compensation. Those might include verbal sexual harassment.