I want to mention the injury portion of your
post. Oftentimes, your sexual assault victims don't necessarily have
injuries or obvious injuries but still should under go a SART exam.
One of the hardest hurdles to overcome in these cases are when the victim and
suspect know each other and unfortunately, this is a very high percentage of
these cases. This can be one of the biggest challenges of these cases
when consent is the defense. Throw into that the drug facilitated assault
and we have one can or hard to investigate worms. Let me give an example.
Let's say there are coworkers and they go to happy hour or dinner etc.
I think that is something most of us have done in our lifetime. The
victim is drugged, which causes him or her to have memory lose.
Oftentimes, they are unaware of ever even having sexual intercourse but
describe "feeling" off or soreness around their genitalia. Due
to the drugs, they have no clear memory of the night or the assault. Add
to this that the drugs used in DFSA's are not detected by the time the victim
is actually examined and a toxicology sample is collected. When we, as
the L/E officer assigned the case, speak to the victim, she can't articulate
the night (Due to reasons mentioned above). When we speak to the suspect,
he tells us his DNA should be located on our victim because they did have sex.
He says the sex was consensual. You see how difficult that example
can be. It sounds like the videos really helped in your example.
Thank you for sharing that!