NIJ Journal No. 252 • July 2005
Prosecutors Programs Ease Victims Anxieties
Final report submitted to NIJ, State and Local
Change and the Violence Against Women Act, Marcia R.
Chaiken, Barbara Boland, Michael D. Maltz, Susan Martin,
and Joseph Tragonski, grant number 98WTVXK013,
available from NCJRS (NCJ 191186).
Solid evidence and the cooperation of witnesses are fundamental
to a successful prosecution. In cases involving violence
against women, these crucial elements are often difficult
to obtain. Researchers investigating State and local responses
to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) found new approaches
implemented by prosecutors in four States (Arizona, Maryland,
Massachusetts, and Oregon) that both led to increased punishment
of offenders who victimized women and eased the strain of
the prosecutorial process for the victims.
New Approaches in Prosecutors Offices
Following the passage of VAWA in 1994, several changes
were instituted at the four study sites:
- The court attorney in Maricopa County, Arizona,
formed a Family Violence Bureau to prosecute felony domestic
violence, stalking, elder abuse, and child physical abuse.
- The States attorney in Wicomico County, Maryland,
assigned VAWA-funded assistant attorneys to handle domestic
violence cases in District Court and then in Circuit Court
for felony cases.
- The district attorney of Essex County, Massachusetts,
increased the number of bilingual domestic violence
unit advocates in the office.
- The district attorneys Domestic Violence Unit
in Multnomah County, Oregon, which had begun with
only one attorney in 1990, was expanded to include six
attorneys, a legal intern, and six victims advocates.
THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), incorporated
in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
of 1994, was intended to bolster the ability of law
enforcement departments, prosecutors, and private nonprofit
victim assistance organizations to enhance services
to women victims of violence, to better assure victim
safety, and to increase offender accountability. The
language of VAWA suggests that these results could be
achieved through three mechanisms: (1) strategic leadership
by the Federal Government to increase coordination among
Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies; (2) Federal
funding for policing, prosecution, and victim services;
and (3) statutory changes allowing for a more active
role on the part of U.S. Attorneys in cases involving
violence against women.
After VAWA was enacted, the Federal Government established
a national hotline, a Violence Against Women Office,
and a national Advisory Council on Violence Against
Women. By the end of 2000, grants exceeding $1 billion
had been made to public and private organizations concerned
with violence against women.
Greater Interagency Collaboration
One of the major benefits of VAWA cited by practitioners
interviewed for this study was a dramatic rise in collaboration
and cooperation in addressing domestic violence. In some
instances, task forces and interagency programs that had
been started prior to passage of VAWA were accelerated
and enhanced. In other areas, new ground was broken in
bringing together prosecutors, other criminal justice
agencies, social service providers, victims advocates,
and victims.
In the four study sites, collaborative efforts included:
- The Maricopa County attorneys office, together
with more than 100 law enforcement, prosecutorial, judicial,
victim service, and mental health professionals, led the
development of a comprehensive criminal justice protocol
for domestic violence that promoted evidence-based prosecutions.
The county attorney also began a program with the Maricopa
Probation Department to provide special case management
for supervising the offenders prosecuted by the Family
Violence Bureau. In 1999, the county attorney supported
the creation of a Family Advocacy Center in Phoenix, Arizona,
with the active participation of both city and county
prosecutors. The Center, directed by the Phoenix ombudsman,
houses representatives of the police, fire, and human
services departments; the municipal court (which can issue
protection orders for victims onsite using closed-circuit
television); three victims services agencies; and
a sexual assault nurse. It also has offices set aside
for the county attorneys staff. The Center includes
a state-of-the-art forensic examination room to support
successful evidence-based prosecutions.
- In Maryland, the governor created the Family Violence
Council (FVC). Co-chaired by the lieutenant governor and
the attorney general, FVC held hearings around the State,
set up local councils, and published Stop the Violence:
A Call to Action, which identified 20 initiatives
to enhance the responsiveness to family violence of all
parts of the justice system and community. In 1999, Marylands
States attorneys, in conjunction with FVC, drafted
a Model States Attorneys Prosecution Policy
and Model Domestic Violence Policy.
- The Domestic Violence Unit in Salem, Massachusetts,
established by the Essex County district attorney, is
housed in an office near the Salem District Court. The
purpose of the unit is to put together a team that can
foster collaboration and cooperation between criminal
justice agencies and victim survivors, resulting in increased
convictions rather than dismissals of domestic violence
cases. A team includes an assistant district attorney,
representatives of the local police departments, a victim/witness
advocate (bilingual, if necessary) from the district attorneys
office, and a victims advocate from a nonprofit
organization that helps abused women and children.
- In Multnomah County, domestic violence offenders released
under the district attorneys deferred sentencing
program are intensely supervised by specially trained
probation officers. Two domestic violence units established
by the Portland (Oregon) Police Bureau with VAWA funds
and the encouragement of the Multnomah County district
attorney include a domestic violence victims advocate
as part of the law enforcement response team.
HOW IS COOPERATION ACHIEVED?
To cooperate effectively, prosecutors and victims
advocates have had to recognize and respect (if not
agree with) their different perspectives and goals.
Prosecutors in the jurisdictions studied saw enactment
of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) as an opportunity
to increase victim safety and offender accountability.
They viewed the victim service provisions, primarily,
as services that would ensure the victims immediate
safety and facilitate the collection of appropriate
statements and evidence to secure a conviction. Victims
and their advocates looked to the law for more direct
short-term aid, such as shelter, and for long-term assistance
that would allow the victim to become psychologically,
emotionally, socially, and financially independent of
the abuser.
From this perspective, prosecutors and advocates often
view new programs very differently. For example, prosecutors
see deferred sentencing as a way to hold accountable
and supervise first-time offenders who would otherwise
serve little or no jail time. Conversely, victims
advocates tend to view deferred sentencing as a slap
on the wrist, not a serious deterrent, and see the offenders
freedom as an ongoing threat, keeping the victim from
getting on with her life. In the study sites, VAWA helped
stimulate initial discussions and ongoing mechanisms
for resolving these concerns, often spearheaded by prosecutors.
The Effect of VAWA
Prior to VAWA, many State, district, and county attorneys
recognized the benefits of providing coordination and
support services for victims of violence who were needed
as witnesses. VAWA funds helped stimulate the allocation
of more resources for prosecuting offenders who victimized
women and more resources for supporting victims through
the harrowing process of bringing those offenders to justice.
Above and beyond funding, strategies incorporated in VAWA
helped bring about an increase in coordination between
prosecutors, including U.S. Attorneys, and staff in other
agencies concerned with preventing revictimization and
reducing further trauma among women who have survived
violence.
WHAT WORKS
According to the studys findings, key steps that
district and county attorneys can take are:
- Forming a specialized unit to prosecute offenders
who sexually assault or abuse women.
- Assigning to these units attorneys and victim/witness
coordinators who have special training and skills in
obtaining evidence and prosecuting sexual predators
and offenders who batter and abuse their wives or girlfriends.
- Locating attorneys and victim/witness coordinators
together in offices shared by shelter-based victim advocates
and other criminal justice agency staff, including police
and community corrections officers specially trained
for dealing with cases involving family violence and
sexual assault.
- Creating cross-agency response teams (one advocate/one
police or probation officer; one advocate/one prosecutor;
one nurse examiner/one advocate/one officer) who train
together and meet with a victim at a suitably designed
facility immediately after an assault has been reported.
- Developing state-of-the-art forensic examination rooms,
offices equipped with closed-circuit telecommunication
with courts, comfortable interview rooms, and childcare
spaces on secure floors in buildings to which victims
can be quickly transported immediately after they report
an assault.
NCJ 208709
For more information
|