Evidence

 

last updated December 2014

In partnership with UN Women, The Advocates for Human Rights created the following sections for UN Women’s Virtual Knowledge Centre to End Violence against Women and Girls. This section, along with sections addressing other forms of violence against women and girls, may be found under Legislation at www.endvawnow.org.

Evidence

·         Legislation should state that it is unlawful to require corroboration of the survivor’s evidence. (Illustrative Examples: Criminal Code (1974) of Papua New Guinea, Section 352A Amended by No. 27 of 2002; UN Handbook 3.9.7.1., and Rule 63(4) of the International Criminal Court’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence.)

·         Legislation should create an assumption of the survivor’s credibility. (See: UN Handbook 3.9.7.1.)

·         Legislation should prohibit the requirement that a victim of sexual violence must submit to a polygraph examination as a condition for proceeding with a criminal investigation, charging, or prosecution of an offense.

·         Legislation should provide that a court may not distinguish between the weight given to the testimony of a complainant, including a minor complainant, in a sexual assault case and the weight given to the testimony of any other witnesses. (Illustrative Examples: Combating of Rape Act, No. 8, (2000) of Namibia, Art. 5; Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act (No. 32) (2007) of South Africa, Ch. 7, sec. 60; the Pennsylvania, USA Consolidated Statutes Crimes and Offences Act (Title 18), §3106; and UN Handbook 3.9.7.1.)

·         Legislation should allow prosecution in the absence of a complainant/survivor where the complainant/survivor is not able or does not wish to give evidence. This is sometimes called absent victim prosecution. The complainant/survivor should be kept informed of all stages of the court proceedings. (See: UN Handbook 3.9.5.)

Legislation should prevent the introduction of the survivor’s sexual history in both civil and criminal proceedings either during the trial or during the sentencing phase where it is unrelated to the case (sometimes called a “rape shield law”). Many victims of rape and sexual assault have felt re-victimized when questioned by defense attorneys about details of their private sexual conduct. Rape shield laws are designed to prevent introduction of a victim’s sexual behavior that is unrelated to the acts that are the subject of the legal proceedings. (See: UN Handbook 3.9.7.2; Report of the Intergovernmental Expert Group Meeting to Review and Update the Model Strategies and Practical Measures on the Elimination of Violence against Women in the Field of Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, 15 (e); and “The Legal Response to Violence against Women in the United States of America: Recent Reforms and Continuing Challenges,” by Sally F. Goldfarb, a paper for the United Nations expert group meeting on good practices in legislation on violence against women, 2008. p. 10.)

Example: Rule 70(d) of the International Criminal Court’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence states that “[c]redibility, character or predisposition to sexual availability of a victim or witness cannot be inferred by reason of the sexual nature of the prior or subsequent conduct of a victim or witness.”

CASE STUDY –
Case of LNP v. Argentina (2011) – Human Rights Committee Finds That Enquires Unrelated to Rape Case Constitute Violation of ICCPR

In 2003, a 15 year old girl who is a member of the Qom ethnic group was sexually assaulted by three young men in Argentina. The victim was questioned by medical staff and witnesses were questioned by the court as to the girl’s virginity and sexual history. In Communication No. 1610/2007, the Human Rights Committee noted that “the constant enquiries by the social worker, by medical personnel and by the court into the author’s sexual life and morality constitute arbitrary interference with her privacy and an unlawful attack on her honour and reputation, all the more so because those enquiries were not relevant to the rape case and related to a minor. The Court referenced its General Comment Number 28, which provides that a woman’s right to privacy is interfered with when “the sexual life of a woman is taken into consideration in deciding the extent of her legal rights and protections, including protections against rape.”

In view of the above, the Committee found a violation of article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. See Communication No. 1610/2007.

Canada’s approach is to state that:

evidence that the complainant has engaged in sexual activity, whether with the accused or with any other person, is not admissible to support an inference that, by reason of the sexual nature of that activity, the complainant

(a) is more likely to have consented to the sexual activity that forms the subject-matter of the charge; or

(b) is less worthy of belief.

The judge, under Canadian law, must determine that the evidence is about specific incidents of sexual activity, is relevant to the issue at trial, and that it has “significant probative value” that is not substantially outweighed by the danger of prejudice to the proper administration of justice. Article 276 of Canada, Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985. c. C-46) as amended by R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 12; 1992, c. 38, s. 2; 2002, c. 13, s. 13.

See: Respect, Protect and Fulfill: Legislating for Women’s Rights in the Context of HIV/AIDS (2009), Volume 1, Module 1; available in English, page 1-24, for additional factors in determining admissibility of evidence.

The Combating of Rape Act, No. 8, (2000) of Namibia states that no evidence about the complainant’s previous sexual activity may be allowed unless the court determines that it:

(a) tends to rebut evidence that was previously adduced by the prosecution; or

(b) tends to explain the presence of semen or the source of pregnancy or disease or any injury to the complainant, where it is relevant to a fact in issue; or

(c) is so fundamental to the accused’s defence that to exclude it would violate the constitutional rights of the accused:

Provided that such evidence or questioning has significant probative value that is not substantially outweighed by its potential prejudice to the complainant’s personal dignity and right of privacy. Art. 18

Example: USA Federal Rule of Evidence 412, which allows for rape shield laws in both civil and criminal proceedings.

·         Legislation should provide that if late applications for admissibility of a victim’s previous sexual history are allowed, an adjournment must occur in order that the prosecution has the opportunity to explain the situation to the victim and to review the state’s position on the relevancy of the evidence.

·         Legislation should allow the presentation of expert testimony on common victim behavior. Jurors who are exposed to relevant social and psychological research on victim behavior can more accurately evaluate victim credibility. For example, many jurors may not understand that it is common for rape victims to not fight back during the rape, and to wait to report the rape. Defense attorneys may pose this behavior as unusual for rape victims, thereby undermining victim credibility. (See:Ellison and Munro, Turning Mirrors Into Windows? Assessing the Impact of (Mock) Juror Education in Rape Trials, 49 Brit. J. Criminology (2009).)

Example: The state of Pennsylvania, United States, has amended its legislation on experts in sexual offense cases in 2012 to state:

(1) In a criminal proceeding subject to this section, a witness may be qualified by the court as an expert if the witness has specialized knowledge beyond that possessed bythe average layperson based on the witness's experience with, or specialized training or education in, criminal justice, behavioral sciences or victim services issues, related to sexual violence, that will assist the trier of fact in understanding the dynamics of sexual violence, victim responses to sexual violence and the impact of sexual violence on victims during and after being assaulted.

(2) If qualified as an expert, the witness may testify to facts and opinions regarding specific types of victimresponses and victim behaviors. Law of Pennsylvania §5920 (2)(b)

See more provisions on evidence in Rights of survivors, below.

Personal records

Legislation should provide that no records of personal information shall be admissible in sexual assault proceedings, unless the survivor or witness to whom the record relates has consented in writing to the disclosure of the personal record. Article 278.1 of Canada, Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46) as amended by 1997, c. 30, s. 1 defines a “record” as follows:

… “record” means any form of record that contains personal information for which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and includes, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, medical, psychiatric, therapeutic, counselling, education, employment, child welfare, adoption and social services records, personal journals and diaries, and records containing personal information the production or disclosure of which is protected by any other Act of Parliament or a provincial legislature, but does not include records made by persons responsible for the investigation or prosecution of the offence.

Medical and forensic evidence

·         Legislation should mandate the timely testing, collection, and preservation of medical and forensic evidence. However, sexual assault evidentiary exams should only be done with the consent of the victim.

·         Legislation should state that a survivor, including a minor survivor, may receive a medical and forensic examination regardless of whether or not the survivor reports to law enforcement. If the survivor has decided to report the assault and receive a medical and forensic examination, legislation should require that the survivor sign a release to share the results of the examination with law enforcement after a full explanation of the release form. In countries with mandatory reporting laws, legislation should require mandatory reporters to provide a full explanation of laws and policies to the survivor when a report is required.

·         Legislation should state that the survivor, including a minor survivor, may be examined and treated by a forensic doctor or other medical practitioner without the consent of any other person.

·         Legislation should state that a minor must not be coerced or intimidated into having an examination by family or other individuals.

·         Legislation should state that all forensic medical examinations or evidentiary examinations should be done at the expense of the state. Victims should be able to visit the hospital of their choice and should not need to be referred by police or prosecutors. Covered costs should include full cost of a rape examination kit, tests related to sexually-transmitted diseases, pregnancy status, and the cost of drugs deemed medically necessary to eliminate conditions resulting from the sexual assault, including the cost of abortions for pregnancy resulting from sexual assault.          

Example: The United States’ Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 requires US states, local governments, other government entities, and Indian tribal governments to incure the full out-of-pocket cost of forensic medical exams for victims of sexual assault, without requiring them to cooperate with law enforcement or to participate in the criminal justice system, in order to be eligible for certain types of government funding. The Reauthorization Act also requires government entitites to work with regional health care providers to notify victims of sexual assault of the availability of rape exams at no cost to the victims. Government entities must notify victims in order to retain their eligibility for VAWA funding.

·         Legislation should require that blood and urine samples be taken at the beginning of each forensic medical examination and that the results of the samples may not be used against the victim.These samples are often the only way to show evidence of drug-facilitated sexual assault

·         Legislation should state that medical and forensic evidence are not required for a sexual assault conviction.

·         Legislation should state that a doctor’s signature is not required on document forms. This has proven to be a barrier to victims in rural areas. Other medical professionals should be authorized to sign forensic medical examination forms.

·         Legislators should consider the demands that legal requirements place on victims and provide a victim-centered legal response to sexual violence. For example, the law may require that a forensic exam take place within a short time frame yet a lack of capacity at clinics may prevent a victim from being seen for several days. See: Harris and Freccero, Sexual Violence: Medical and Psychosocial Support (2011). Available in English.

National SATU Guidelines Development Group, Recent Rape/Sexual Assault National Guidelines on Referral and Forensic Clinical Examination in Ireland (2010). These guidelines are a resource for law enforcement, health, psycho-social and related service providers and aim to further promote interagency coordination in responding to survivors of sexual assault. They include reference pages for responding to cases of sexual assault and rape; the referral process for Sexual Assault Treatment Units; contact information for Treatment Units; and a guide on preserving forensic evidence. The resource also includes detailed guidance for receiving and responding to survivors of sexual violence, including referring and following-up on cases, with specific sections for police, forensic examiners, forensic laboratories, as well as general practitioners. Available in English.

United States Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women, A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations: Adults/Adolescents (Second Edition, 2013) establishes guidelines for forensic medical examinations in sexual assault cases. The guidelines support a coordinated community response that places the victim’s physical and emotional needs over the needs of the criminal justice system. They offer detailed recommendations on equipment needed and methods for best evidence collection. The guidelines also state that voluntary use of alcohol or drugs “should not diminish the perceived seriousness of the assault.” Available in English.

·         Legislation should require protocols to store unreported evidence. Legislation should require that notice be given to the survivor regarding how long such evidence will remain viable for a report.

CASE STUDY:
Human Rights Watch Report: Testing Justice: The Rape Kit Backlog in Los Angeles City and County

In 2009, Human Rights Watch released the report Testing Justice: The Rape Kit Backlog in Los Angeles City and County. The report found that, as of March 1, 2009, there were over 12,000 untested rape kits in storage facilities in these locations. Rape kits are comprised of evidence which is carefully collected from the victim when the rape is reported: DNA from every part of the victim’s body touched by the rapist; photographs of injuries, including magnified photographs of tears or other injuries to the victim’s genital area; fingernail scrapings; and blood and urine samples. This evidence is sealed into a large envelope and stored with police. The evidence from the kits may not only identify the assailant, it may corroborate future testimony about the assault, or connect the assailant to other victims.

The report found that although victims may believe that the evidence is automatically tested, and that no word from the police meant that they could not identify the attacker, thousands of rape kits remained untested. In some cases, the kits are from cases which are now past the 10-year statute of limitations for rape in California and can no longer be prosecuted. Untested kits can also mean that rapists remain at large.

The report revealed that although the police and sheriff’s departments received federal funds to address the backlog of untested kits, the number of untested kits continued to grow. It found that officials sometimes delayed ordering kits to be tested when they did not believe that a crime had occurred..

Human Rights Watch called upon the Los Angeles Police and Sheriff’s Departments to meet US obligations under international law and ensure justice to victims of sexual violence by:

·         Preserving every booked rape kit until it is tested.

·         Enforcing policy which requires the testing of every booked rape kit.

·         Identifying resources needed to test each kit and pursuing investigative leads from the kits.

·         Prioritizing funding which is necessary to implement rape kit testing and investigation of cases.

·         Implementing a system to inform victims of the status of their rape kit test.

The Los Angeles law enforcement officials have agreed to test all rape kits in the backlog and all those collected in the future.

Example: In response to another report by Human Rights Watch on a large backlog of untested rape kits in the state of Illinois, United States, Illinois enacted the 2010 Sexual Assault Evidence Submission Act on July 6, 2010. The law, the first of its kind in the United States, requires that every rape kit booked into evidence by police must be sent to the crime lab for testing within 10 days of being collected. The law, however, contains a provision that the timeframe requirement is dependent on “sufficient staffing and resources.”

(See: Sections on Rights of Survivors and Survivor Services)