TBC

Treatment of Rape Victims and Suspects

Psychology and the Law

One of the lingering problems in the modern criminal justice system is how sexual assault is treated by people inside the criminal justice system. Victims of sexual assault are not treated in the same manner as victims of other crimes; instead, they have traditionally received much more blame for the crime than other crime victims. Traditionally, rape victims have been blamed for dressing too provocatively, engaging in sexually arousing behavior, or even for engaging in consensual sexual behavior with someone other than the assailant in an effort to mitigate the crime against them. Sexual assault advocates have tried to fight back against this by empowering the victim, but, in some instances those empowerment efforts are counterproductive in a law enforcement scenario. Victims have not been the only ones to suffer from stereotypes in the criminal justice system: suspects have been treated unfairly as well. There is tremendous racial basis in rape prosecutions. Historically, this is at least partially attributable to the fact that a white woman who had consensual sex with a black man would lose her social standing. The stereotype of the sexually predatory black male continues to influence much of modern criminal justice, even if it is no longer openly acknowledged. One can see how all of these complex psychological issues present themselves in the Law and Order: Special Victims Unit episode, "True Believers."

Synopsis

In "True Believers," a pianist named Sarah, a Caucasian woman, is raped in her apartment at gunpoint by a black man named Michael. The rape is portrayed on camera, so that the audience is aware that Michael did, in fact, rape Sarah. However, Sarah showers after the attack and delays reporting the assault until the next day. At the hospital, a rape crises worker informs Sarah that the shower will make it more difficult to prosecute the case and tells her that she does not have to prosecute the assault, a statement that Detective Benson finds objectionable. Benson accompanies Sarah back to her apartment. The detectives are able to identify Michael from surveillance footage in Sarah's apartment elevator, but during the investigation of the rape, Detectives Fin and Rollins apprehend other black men as suspects because of their resemblance to Michael. Sarah encounters Michael at a bar and calls the detectives, who arrest him. Michael has marijuana and a gun on him at the time of the arrest. It is revealed that Sarah is having a romantic relationship with one of her professors and that she had a one-night stand one night before her sexual assault. Defense counsel uses those facts and Sarah's friendly demeanor towards Michael in the elevator to establish reasonable doubt and Michael is acquitted of the sexual assault.

Psychological treatment of victim

Contrary to most people's perceptions, stranger rape scenarios, like the one shown in the television show, are actually not the most likely rape scenarios. People are far more likely to be acquainted with their rapist than to be raped by an unknown assailant. Furthermore, there has been a tremendous amount of public education about this factor, because many people were simply unaware of the existence of acquaintance rape. Despite this push for education, people still envision a typical female rape as being conceptualized along the stranger rape stereotype (Anderson, 2007). Sarah's rape in the television show was a stranger rape, but there were elements that took it outside of the typical stranger rape scenario and seemed to blur the lines between stranger and acquaintance rape, at least for people outside of her apartment. For example, Sarah and Michael were shown being friendly towards one another in the elevator. Rather than jumping out of a bush and raping Sarah in a park, Michael went into her apartment building and pretended to be friendly. Though he forced his way into her home at gunpoint, the image that the television jurors could see was one of the two of them interacting in a friendly manner. It would certainly have been a stretch to describe the two of them as acquaintances, since there was no indication that they knew each other prior to being in the same elevator, but the rape was far enough outside of the stereotype of stranger rape scenarios that it presented an element of doubt about consent to the jury.

The first interaction that the rape victim, Sarah, has with the criminal justice system involves interactions with the police and with a rape crises counselor. The rape crises counselor tells her that, because she has showered since the assault, it will be more difficult to prosecute her case and reminds her that she does not have to prosecute the assailant. Theoretically, the idea behind reminding victims that they do not have to prosecute sexual assault assailants is to remind them that they have control over their bodies and their actions, since the rape has represented a loss of control. Historically, victims have reported that testifying at trial has been almost as traumatic as the actual rape because they are put on trial for their behavior, particularly their prior sexual behavior. Therefore, the rape crises counselor almost certainly intended to be helpful. However, with her words she was sending a message to Sarah that, by showering, she had destroyed her chance at attaining justice in the system, and that her case may not be worth prosecuting. This is a message that real-life sexual assault victims get on a daily basis and it reinforces the idea that they are somehow to blame for what has occurred to them or less worthy of justice than another rape victim might be.

At the end of the television show, Sarah reacts with rage towards Benson because Michael was not convicted. One of the hallmarks of rape victims is that they actually respond in ways that seems illogical to the casual observer. In the television show, Benson was consistently supportive of Sarah; she did nothing to earn her rage. However, it is critical to understand that sexual assault has a number of "effects that appear to vary as a function of the type of assault and a large number of victim-specific, trauma-related, and sociocultural variables. These variable and complex impacts are of such breadth that a given disorder or symptom cluster (e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD], complex PTSD, or rape trauma syndrome) is relatively unlikely to capture the overall symptomatic experience of a given victim of violence" (Briere & Jordan, 2004). In other words, there is no stereotype response for sexual assault victims, and the continuing perception that victims should respond in a certain manner leads some people to question the veracity of rape reports, because the victim is not acting like a stereotypical victim.

While the television show did not portray the jury's thought process, it did attempt to portray the information that the jury received and then presented the jury's conclusion. Of course, the viewer was aware that the rape had occurred, but the jury did not have the same evidence as the viewer. Instead, the jury had the evidence that came before it. Based on that evidence, one must wonder whether the jury made the correct conclusion about Michael's legal guilt. It is very easy to criticize a jury's decision based on individual perceptions of what occurred or evidence that would not be admissible in the courtroom, but the jury may hear a much more limited version of the case. It is important to ask: was there enough evidence to convict Michael of rape beyond a reasonable doubt?

In order to answer this question, it is important to consider what a jury does when considering a sexual assault charge. According to Olsen-Fullero and Fullero, a jury selects stories from the evidence and testimony, based on the empathy-complexity theory of story making (1997). In other words, given what they know and how empathetic the different witnesses appear, how likely does a story seem to be? What they know about Sarah is that she is having sex with a professor, which is certainly a partial societal sexual taboo. They also find out that she had a consensual one night stand with another man the night before the alleged assault. She did not report the assault immediately, but played at a recital after the assault. The story that Michael's defense counsel weaves is one where his black client has been wrongfully accused of a sexual assault and that his race is a factor in the accusation as demonstrated by the police apprehending the wrong black suspects. Moreover, defense counsel can show a video where Sarah and Michael appear to be friendly with one another. The jury is called to decide which scenario is more likely, that the friendly-looking guy in the elevator followed Sarah out of the elevator, held her at gunpoint, forced himself into her apartment, and raped her, or that Sarah, a woman who is not adverse to one night stands, invited the friendly guy from the elevator inside and had consensual sexual intercourse with him. When viewed from that perspective, it becomes understandable that a jury could not eliminate the second story beyond a reasonable doubt, and, therefore, had to acquit Michael of the crime.

Psychological treatment of suspect

Given America's complex racial history, it is no surprise that race is oftentimes seen as a significant factor in rape. There is no doubt that black men have been unfairly targeted as rapists in America. This is due to a combination of factors, but has to do with mistaken identity in cross-racial sexual assaults and also consenting partners claiming assault when the sexual relationship is revealed. In this television episode, the assailant and his defense counsel played upon these stereotypes to suggest that Michael had not committed an assault. However, the television audience was aware that he had raped Sarah at gunpoint, a situation that is not even ambiguously consensual. However, by using the stereotypes in his favor in order to demonstrate his innocence, Michael is able to achieve an acquittal.

The episode makes one wonder if there is some truth to the stereotype that black men are more likely to rape than white men. Given the horrific history of how white men have been able to assault brown-skinned women without any fear of punishment for hundreds of years, it seems almost irresponsible to even suggest that might be the case. However, in American society, African-American males are far more likely to be disadvantaged than advantaged, and there is a legitimate reason to believe that disadvantaged males may be more likely to engage in sexual assaults than advantaged males. In a study where participants were made to feel either disadvantaged or advantaged relative to their male peers, the participants who were made to feel disadvantaged reported fewer negative attitudes towards rape (Nunes & Pettersen, 2011). For the researchers, the evolutionary explanation behind this behavior is that disadvantaged males have not had the same opportunities for consensual sex as advantaged males, and that to procreate they have had to engage in sexual assaults (Nunes & Pettersen, 2011). This makes one wonder if any group that is considered disadvantaged when compared to the normative group in society would be more likely to engage in sexual assault. The glaring problem with that is probably the idea that advantaged males have traditionally engaged in sexual assaults without acknowledging them as such, making one wonder if there is actually a difference in likelihood to commit sexual assault based on advantaged status or whether the perception that one would be committing a sexual assault is what actually changes.

Moreover, it seems unlikely that African-American males, or any group that is actually disadvantaged in modern society, would actually find this an excuse to rape. A study by Crocker and Major examined prejudice and self-esteem and found that, contrary to expectations, being a member of stigmatized group did not impact a person's global self-esteem (1989). If there is no impact on global self-esteem, it certainly seems like it would be difficult to suggest that a rapist in a disadvantaged group would feel the same level of disadvantage as members of a controlled study who were made to feel disadvantaged. Instead, it seems far more likely that people would consider advantage in comparison to their own self-identified peer group. Michael's peer group might be other young, black males, and he would have no disadvantage in that group. On the other hand, he may consider his peer group to be other males his age group and feel disadvantaged when compared to that group, and, thus, be more likely to rape. It appears that his own self-esteem is going to impact his perception of whether he is advantaged or disadvantaged more than actual statistics regarding his relative likelihood of success based on his race in comparison to the rest of American society. Therefore, it seems likely that further studies will demonstrate that race does not factor into the decreased negative feelings towards race one sees in disadvantaged groups.

Conclusion

In real life, sexual assaults are one of the most difficult crimes to prosecute, because the very act at the center of the assault, intercourse, is rarely done, whether consensually or by force, in the presence of third-party witnesses. Instead, it frequently comes down to a case of he-said / she-said, and the jury's conclusion about the existence of an assault will depend on its impression of the accused and the accuser. Therefore, jurors have to rely upon what they know about both persons, the victim and the alleged rapist, in order to determine whether an assault occurred. Of course, jurists do not make these judgments in a vacuum; instead, they bring all of their knowledge with them into the courtroom. It is important to keep in mind that specific knowledge about other events can influence the jury's perception. For example, in this television show the defense attorney used the fact that black men have historically been falsely accused of sexual assault in his client's favor. The jury members could not be unaware of the racial bias that exists in the American criminal justice system. Therefore, to suggest that such racial bias was implicated in this particular trial, even though the television audience knew that Michael had, in fact, raped Sarah at gunpoint was a way for defense counsel to introduce reasonable doubt to the jury. Moreover, the fact that Michael had actually committed the assault does not mean that there was not some racial bias in the handling of the case; the police apprehended other black male suspects who did not have a significant physical resemblance to Michael, reinforcing the idea of some type of bias.