Urban Institute, Washington, DC, United States.
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States.
J Interpers Violence. 2022 Apr;37(7-8):NP5693-NP5727. doi: 10.1177/0886260520961870. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
Despite the widespread use of sexual assault medical forensic exams (SAMFEs), practitioners and researchers continue to debate the role of SAMFEs and the evidence they provide in the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault cases. Using data from a review of sexual assault cases reported to police between 2015 and 2017 in two jurisdictions ( = 534), we use logistic regression examine whether the presence of a SAMFE predicts the likelihood of achieving criminal case processing outcomes and whether the relationship of the SAMFE with criminal case processing outcomes is moderated by other legal and extralegal case characteristics. We did not find evidence that the presence of a SAMFE in a case significantly predicts whether a suspect will be identified, arrested, or convicted overall, but we did find evidence of the SAMFE's injury documentation value for arrest. Researchers and practitioners should account for the multiple ways SAMFEs can influence decision-making in future research and policymaking.
尽管性侵犯医疗取证检查(SAMFE)被广泛应用,但从业者和研究人员仍在继续争论 SAMFE 的作用以及它们在性侵犯案件的调查和起诉中提供的证据。本研究使用了 2015 年至 2017 年在两个司法管辖区(=534)向警方报告的性侵犯案件审查数据,我们使用逻辑回归检验 SAMFE 的存在是否预测了实现刑事案件处理结果的可能性,以及 SAMFE 与刑事案件处理结果的关系是否受到其他法律和法外案件特征的调节。我们没有发现证据表明案件中存在 SAMFE 会显著预测嫌疑人是否会被识别、逮捕或定罪,但我们确实发现了 SAMFE 在逮捕方面对伤害记录的价值的证据。研究人员和从业者应该在未来的研究和决策中考虑到 SAMFE 可以影响决策的多种方式。