Cargando…

Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US

In recent years, a significant number of investigations have discovered up to 200 000 unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) in the US. While the public outcry was largely directed towards DNA analysis, the SAKs also contained biological specimens specifically designated for toxicological analysis....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Williams, Chinyere M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8635549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34868710
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2021.1960465
_version_ 1784608337030021120
author Williams, Chinyere M.
author_facet Williams, Chinyere M.
author_sort Williams, Chinyere M.
collection PubMed
description In recent years, a significant number of investigations have discovered up to 200 000 unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) in the US. While the public outcry was largely directed towards DNA analysis, the SAKs also contained biological specimens specifically designated for toxicological analysis. Due to the sensitivity of analytes in potential drug facilitated sexual assaults, the preservation and maintenance of the specimens is crucial in providing accurate toxicological measurements. The investigations into the unsubmitted SAKs have identified subjective law enforcement officer (LEO) rationale for the unsubmitted kits, however the impact on toxicological specimens has not been examined. This brief review of policies and guidelines with respect to forensic specimens has identified potential sources of evidentiary degradation, despite the use of chemical preservatives. With respect to temperature-controlled environments, the variation in SAK submission policies established throughout the US are potentially detrimental to the preservation of toxicological evidence. Degradation as a result of time-delayed collection and poorly maintained storage temperatures plays a crucial role for/in the interpretation of qualitative and quantitative toxicological results. This review finds these delays can be addressed through modernisation of facilities; electronic tracking of unsubmitted SAKs; mandated transfer of biological evidence within 72 h; and documentation of temperature within the chain of custody or other records. Without identifying the range of temperatures in which the evidence was exposed, forensic toxicologists may unintentionally provide erroneous interpretations of toxicological analyses – potentially casting doubt on the survivor’s recall of events and negatively impacting future sexual assault investigations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8635549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86355492021-12-02 Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US Williams, Chinyere M. Forensic Sci Res Review In recent years, a significant number of investigations have discovered up to 200 000 unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) in the US. While the public outcry was largely directed towards DNA analysis, the SAKs also contained biological specimens specifically designated for toxicological analysis. Due to the sensitivity of analytes in potential drug facilitated sexual assaults, the preservation and maintenance of the specimens is crucial in providing accurate toxicological measurements. The investigations into the unsubmitted SAKs have identified subjective law enforcement officer (LEO) rationale for the unsubmitted kits, however the impact on toxicological specimens has not been examined. This brief review of policies and guidelines with respect to forensic specimens has identified potential sources of evidentiary degradation, despite the use of chemical preservatives. With respect to temperature-controlled environments, the variation in SAK submission policies established throughout the US are potentially detrimental to the preservation of toxicological evidence. Degradation as a result of time-delayed collection and poorly maintained storage temperatures plays a crucial role for/in the interpretation of qualitative and quantitative toxicological results. This review finds these delays can be addressed through modernisation of facilities; electronic tracking of unsubmitted SAKs; mandated transfer of biological evidence within 72 h; and documentation of temperature within the chain of custody or other records. Without identifying the range of temperatures in which the evidence was exposed, forensic toxicologists may unintentionally provide erroneous interpretations of toxicological analyses – potentially casting doubt on the survivor’s recall of events and negatively impacting future sexual assault investigations. Taylor & Francis 2021-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8635549/ /pubmed/34868710 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2021.1960465 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of the Academy of Forensic Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Williams, Chinyere M.
Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title_full Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title_fullStr Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title_full_unstemmed Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title_short Evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the US
title_sort evidentiary discrepancies in sexual assault casework within the us
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8635549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34868710
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2021.1960465
work_keys_str_mv AT williamschinyerem evidentiarydiscrepanciesinsexualassaultcaseworkwithintheus