Part II of this series on protecting victim privacy in domestic abuse and sexual assault cases discusses common statutory or evidentiary privileges and the scenarios in which conflicts with these privileges may arise. The article also provides prosecutors with strategies to protect privileges when the privacy interests of victims may outweigh the obligation to disclose.
Williams v. Illinois and Forensic Evidence – The Bleeding Edge of Crawford
The application of Crawford principles in the context of forensic evidence continues to plague the criminal justice system. The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Williams v. Illinois raises more questions than it answers about when and how an expert may testify to conclusions based upon the opinions or work of other (non-testifying) experts or technicians. This article reviews the relevant case law, and explores how trial prosecutors can present a case involving forensic testing conducted by a multitude of technicians and experts. It also addresses Williams’ impact on cold cases, in which original experts who performed autopsies and other forensic examinations and testing are no longer available for trial. The author provides practical suggestions to trial prosecutors who must balance limited resources against the need to secure convictions that will withstand confrontation challenges on appeal.
Williams-v-Illinois-and-Forensic-Evidence-The-Bleeding-Edge-of-Crawford-Issue-11
Beyond Conviction Rates: Measuring Success in Sexual Assault Prosecutions
Prosecutorial effectiveness is commonly measured by conviction rates, largely because they are readily available. But, are conviction rates an accurate measure of success? Experienced prosecutors know they won’t win every case. In fact, some would argue that if you aren’t losing any cases, you aren’t trying the right ones. This Strategies Newsletter discusses promising sexual assault prosecution strategies as well as ways of measuring effectiveness in ways that do not rely solely upon conviction rates. The article also offers other, more meaningful performance measures, and describes how they can be used to more accurately measure and sustain effective prosecution practices.
Integrating a Trauma-Informed Response in Violence Against Women and Human Trafficking Prosecutions
This Strategies Newsletter describes a trauma-informed approach to responding to these crimes and discusses practices where such an approach has already been incorporated, highlighting areas where continued, additional integration is necessary. This article also identifies gaps in the application of the approach, specifically in reference to other co-occurring, violence against women and human trafficking crimes, and suggests strategies to more effectively integrate trauma-informed investigative and prosecutorial practices.
Integrating-A-Trauma-Informed-Response-In-VAW-and-HT-Strategies
The Highly Trained Batterer: Prevention, Investigation and Prosecution of Officer-Involved Domestic Violence
This article discusses the dynamics and tactics commonly encountered in officer-involved domestic violence; emphasizes the importance of departmental policies and protocols for prevention of, and response to, violence in the law enforcement family; explains the need for a coordinated, yet firewalled internal investigation that will not compromise the criminal prosecution of the offender; and suggests strategies for investigation and prosecution of officer-involved domestic violence.
Prosecuting Image Exploitation
Image exploitation involves the non-consensual creation, possession, or distribution of an image or images depicting victims engaged in consensual sexual activity or being sexually assaulted. As technology continues to evolve more quickly than the law, image exploitation crimes are being addressed by a patchwork of criminal laws. This Strategies Newsletter gives prosecutors insight on how to respond to this complex crime and to hold offenders accountable under imperfect or untested laws. The article explores the various forms of image exploitation and the types of statutes under which this abuse can be prosecuted.
Pennsylvania’s New Victim Behavior Expert Testimony Statute Upheld: Commonwealth v. Olivo
On November 18, 2015, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Commonwealth v. Olivo, upholding, against state constitutional attack, the new Pennsylvania evidentiary statute permitting expert testimony to explain victim behavior in the prosecution of crimes of sexual violence. Previously, the courts of Pennsylvania had steadfastly resisted admission of such testimony, despite the widespread acceptance of such evidence by other courts across the country. This article reviews the facts of the case and discusses its implications for highlighting the important role of expert testimony in aiding juries to reach just verdicts, unhindered by myths and misconceptions about how “real” victims would behave. Pennsylvanias-New-Victim-Behavior-Expert-Testimony-Statute-Upheld-Commonwealth-v.-Olivo-SIB25
The Prosecutors’ Resource on Crawford and its Progeny
There are many barriers to victims’ participation in the prosecution of their abusers. When prosecuting a domestic violence case with a non-participating victim (one who either is not in court, or who is in court but is unavailable by reason of refusal to testify, exercise of a privilege, illness, or incompetency) the prosecutor must anticipate a challenge under Crawford v. Washington to the introduction of the victim’s out-of-court statements. Crawford and its progeny are landmark cases that address the admissibility of out-of-court statements in light of an accused’s Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. This Resource focuses on interpretations of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause under Crawford. The prosecutor must be aware, however, of the simultaneous need to satisfy state evidence rules concerning hearsay. This paper places Crawford in its historical context, presents a framework for analyzing admissibility of out-of-court statements under the Crawford rules, and provides resources, sample questions, and strategy suggestions to assist the prosecutor in satisfying the confrontation requirements under the Sixth Amendment.
The Prosecutors’ Resource on Witness Intimidation
This resource outlines effective prosecution strategies for cases where witness intimidation is, or may be, a factor. It provides guidance for prosecution practices that will enhance the safety of victims and witnesses. The paper discusses the first steps a prosecutor should take upon being assigned a case in which witness intimidation is, or may be, an issue. It then discusses strategies for the various phases of a criminal prosecution, from pretrial through the final pretrial conference. Finally, the paper discusses sentencing considerations, including the need for appropriate post-release conditions that enhance the ongoing safety of victims and witnesses.
Ohio v. Clark: A Bit of Confrontation Clarification, A Few Tantalizing Hints
The United States Supreme Court decision in Ohio v. Clark has been heralded by many prosecutors and legal scholars as significantly broadening the admissibility of evidence under the Confrontation Clause, as interpreted by Crawford v. Washington and its progeny. The decision does not break startling new ground, however; rather, the Court’s decision is one that flows more or less naturally from the Court’s previous pronouncements about what it is that makes a hearsay statement testimonial, and therefore inadmissible at trial unless the witness is subject to cross-examination, either at trial or (in the case of a witness unavailable for trial) at a prior proceeding. This article reviews the opinion’s direction and guidance to trial courts (and prosecutors) about the admissibility of statements made to individuals not affiliated with law enforcement, as well as statements made by children or others who may be limited in their ability to grasp the notion of potential future prosecution. The article discusses the importance of the opinion’s deviation from the language used in previous decisions—a distinction that promises to fuel the ongoing debate about the future of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence.
Ohio-v.-Clark-A-Bit-of-Confrontation-Clarification-A-Few-Tantalizing-Hints-SIB30
