Advancing Justice with Forensic Genetic Genealogy

Forensic Genetic Genealogy (FGG) is an innovative method of DNA analysis that combines forensic analysis with traditional genealogy research.  Investigative leads developed from this work assist law enforcement in identifying an unknown perpetrator or victim. This technique is exceptionally beneficial to resolving cold case violent crimes, in which other traditional leads have been exhausted.

Recognizing the value of this powerful investigative tool, the National Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI) became the first federal program to allow FGG to be applied to criminal investigations using federal funding. Since 2019, SAKI grantees have leveraged FGG testing to support hundreds of investigations resulting in the identification of previously unknown perpetrators, including serial offenders. As many of these SAKI cases are now proceeding to trial, prosecutors are having to navigate the nuances of FGG in a legal setting.

In this presentation, the presenters provide an overview of FGG, evidentiary challenges for prosecutors and investigators, including surreptitious collection of DNA from suspects, affidavits for search warrants and discovery requests implicating FGG, managing developing issues at pre-trial hearings, and trial testimony associated with FGG investigative leads.

At the completion of this presentation, attendees will:
– Develop a basic understanding of forensic genetic genealogy (FGG) and its application to violent crime cold case investigations.
– Recognize the value of FGG as an investigative tool.
– Develop strategies to investigate and prosecute cold case violent crimes associated with FGG leads.
– Create approaches for resolving cold case violent crimes including   victim and/or family notification and engagement, and cold case litigation strategies.
– Provide an interactive conversation for identifying and discussing developing issues and practitioner responses in investigations and prosecution involving advanced DNA technology.

This project was supported by Grant No. 15PBJA-23-GK-00708-JAGP and Grant No. 2019-MU-BX-K011 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the 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.

Working with and Supporting Families of Homicide Victims

Being assigned a homicide case is one of the greatest responsibilities given to an individual prosecutor. While these cases invite tremendous scrutiny and demand intense preparation, one aspect that prosecutors rarely receive any formal training in is how to work with the family and friends of the deceased victim. Even though prosecutors are in the business of helping, this gap can sometimes lead to misunderstandings and unnecessary frustrations in an often opaque and stressful process.

This presentation will focus on strategies a prosecutor can use to work with the family and friends of homicide victims by looking for ways to increase education about the system generally as well as explain in a trauma-informed way the strengths and challenges of an individual case. Focus will also be given to exploring the legal obligations and limitations that may arise in working with a homicide victim’s family.

At the conclusion of this presentation, participants will be better able to:
– Understand obligations and the benefits of consistently notifying a homicide victim’s family of case updates.
– Develop strategies to navigate situations when a homicide victim’s family may be adversarial and how to mitigate such circumstances from arising.
– Educate homicide victims’ families about unique circumstances such as those involving juvenile defendants, death penalty cases, and cold cases.

This project was supported by 15JOVW-24-GK-03009-MUMU awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

Framework for Prosecutors to Strengthen Our National Response to Sexual Assault & Domestic Violence Involving Adult Victims

Written by prosecutors for prosecutors, this guide reflects decades of insight and experience prosecuting sexual violence and domestic violence of more than 120 state, Tribal, military, and federal prosecutors as well as advocates, academics, and investigators who have dedicated their careers to combatting sexual assault and domestic violence.DOJ SA-DV Prosecutor Guide may 2024

Prosecution Foundations: Capturing the Full Extent of the Offender’s Criminality

The IACP and AEquitas, with support from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, hosted a conversation between Jane Anderson, Senior Attorney Advisor with AEquitas and David Weiss, the Chief of the Human Trafficking Unit at Kings County (Brooklyn, New York) District Attorney’s Office. As a co-chair of Brooklyn’s Enhanced Collaborative Model Human Trafficking Task Force, David has extensive experience collaborating on human trafficking responses, including working with law enforcement early in investigations and supervising complex prosecutions. Jane and David discussed how broadening human trafficking investigations can enhance prosecutions, decrease reliance on victim participation, and ensure support to victims is trauma-informed.

This presentation will enhance your ability to:
-Identify criminal activity and co-occurring charges common in human trafficking cases;
-Collaborate with law enforcement to enhance victim-centered investigations; and
-Litigate the admission of “other bad acts” in sex and labor trafficking cases

This webinar is part of IACP/OVC’s Enhanced Collaborative Model anti-human trafficking task force training catalog. The materials presented aim to help Enhanced Collaborative Model anti-human trafficking task forces seek justice on the behalf of human trafficking victims and survivors.

This webinar was produced by the International Association of Chiefs of Police under Cooperative Agreement #2020-VT-BX-K002, awarded by the Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this webinar are those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Understanding the Supreme Court’s Decision in United States v. Rahimi

United States v. Rahimi became a widely followed case in the 2024 Supreme Court docket after the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (covering Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi) issued its decision in United States v. Rahimi, 59 F.4th 163 (5th Cir. 2023). The Court ruled that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits gun possession by people who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders, is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. 

This decision reverberated across the country, and in the wake of the Fifth Circuit decision, the Supreme Court took a writ of Certiorari to resolve the conflict. Ultimately, on June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court overturned the Fifth Circuit and upheld the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). This Strategies in Brief newsletter unpacks the holding of the Supreme Court, and provides guidance to prosecutors moving forward on applying this ruling to their work. 

This project was supported by Grant No. 15JOVW-22-GK-03987-MUMU awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.RahimiDecision_FINAL

Prosecutor Guide to Jury Selection in Cases with LGBTQ+ Victims of Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking

A prosecutor’s first opportunity to combat potential bias during a criminal trial is jury selection. Jury selection, also known as voir dire, provides an opportunity to address bias, correct misconceptions, and strive for fairness in the process. Jury selection is also an opportunity to educate the panel about the crime and parties, to obtain promises to follow instructions on the law, and to plant seeds about the concepts of fairness and justice in the context of the current case. For cases involving LGBTQ+ victims, a comprehensive voir dire strategy is key to ensuring that anti-LGBTQ+ bias does not determine the outcome of the trial.

This Guide, developed in partnership with AEquitas and the American Bar Association, is designed to support prosecutors in drafting jury selection questions and related motions in limine to help address anti-LGBTQ+ bias among potential jurors.

This project was supported by Grant No. 15JOVW-21-GK-02238-MUMU awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.Prosecutor Guide to Jury Selection (OVW Approved)

Commonwealth v. Rogers, 8 EAP 2020, Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of the Commonwealth

In this amicus brief, AEquitas, the Women’s Law Project, and 26 additional amici share their expertise in support of a determination that Pennsylvania’s Rape Shield Law does not permit the introduction of evidence of a complainant’s criminal record for prostitution-related offenses. Introducing this evidence would reinforce prejudicial gender and racial biases that would inhibit justice from prevailing and increase the burden of a criminal record on victims of sexual violence and exploitation.Amicus-Curiae-Brief-with-Time-Stamp

Shielding the Victim: Litigating Rape Shield Motions

Rape shield laws provide prosecutors with a powerful tool to counter defense attempts to introduce irrelevant and highly prejudicial evidence of a victim’s sexual history at trial. First codified into law in 1974 in the state of Michigan, rape shield provisions now exist in every jurisdiction in the United States. They seek to eliminate the influence of an archaic and dangerous body of law that protected only the chaste, perpetuated overly broad notions of consent, and left victims without justice. All rape shield laws require exclusion of the victim’s prior sexual conduct unless the evidence falls within a specified exception. However, these laws have not stopped defense attempts to stretch the limits of codified exceptions in order to admit evidence of the victim’s sexual behavior. Marginalized communities, in particular, have been negatively affected by rulings under these laws. Prosecutors must be vigilant in their efforts to safeguard victims’ privacy to ensure they are not humiliated, silenced, and blamed for their own assaults.

This presentation discusses the history and foundation of rape shield laws, identifies and discusses the most frequent areas of appellate litigation, and provides prosecutors with the tools to effectively litigate rape shield motions. Presenters also discuss trial strategies to employ if efforts to preclude information about a victim’s prior sexual conduct are unsuccessful.

As a result of this presentation, participants will be able to:
-Litigate rape shield motions to protect victim privacy
-Prosecute cases using an offender-focused approach
-Employ strategies to mitigate harm to the victim and the case when evidence of victim’s prior sexual conduct is admitted

This project was supported by Grant No. 15JOVW-22-GK-03987-MUMU awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

When and How: Admitting Expert Testimony on Victim Behavior in Sexual Assault Cases in Pennsylvania

On June 29, 2012, Pennsylvania shed its distinction of being the only state in which expert testimony to explain victim behavior in sexual assault cases was inadmissible by enacting Section 5920 of the Judicial Code, “Expert testimony in certain criminal proceedings.” The law, which became effective on August 28, 2012, is a critical tool for prosecutors seeking to provide a context for understanding sexual assault and sexual assault victims, as well as to counter entrenched myths and misperceptions about sexual assault and sexual assault victims. This article explains the prevalence of sexual violence myths among the public, how expert testimony on sexual assault victims’ behavior can help dispel these myths, and strategies for introducing such testimony at trial.AEquitas_When-and-How-Admitting-Expert-Testimony-on-Victim-Behavior-in-PA-Issue-18_5-2013

“Next-Level” Compulsion of Victim Testimony in Crimes of Sexual and Intimate Partner Violence: Prosecutorial Considerations Before Using Bench Warrants/Body Attachments and Material Witness Warrants

This article examines the considerations that should be weighed in deciding whether to employ next-level measures, such as material witness warrants and body attachments, to compel victim testimony in sexual and intimate partner violence cases. While prosecutors have a great deal of discretion in deciding whether to use compulsive measures beyond issuance of a subpoena, the decision to resort to such measures should be made with great care and with an awareness of the potential consequences, as well as consideration of possible alternatives.

This project was supported by Grant No. 15JOVW-21-GK-02220-MUMU awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). The opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice.

Next-Level Compulsion of Victim Testimony