There is No Statute of Limitations for Help
By: Zachary Malinski, UC Davis School of Law
Anne is a survivor of multiple childhood rapes perpetrated by members of her family. After suppressing memories of her trauma for decades, she decided to report her attackers to authorities. This process should have been simple. Instead, Anne was bounced from one jurisdiction to the next without much explanation of what to expect. While the officers she spoke to were usually compassionate and kind, Anne nonetheless felt like an outsider looking into a world she knew nothing about, hoping she could find justice. Each officer she spoke to told her a different process to use. At each turn, Anne was frustrated at how confusing and foreign the criminal justice system is for sexual assault survivors. Even now, years after reporting her case, she is still waiting for follow up. Anne is not alone.
For better or worse, our criminal justice system revolves around the defendant. Police officers gather evidence, and prosecutors analyze its impact on the guilt or innocence of the accused. They must then decide whether to charge, what to charge, and how to win their trials. This process is complex, time consuming, and involves many different actors. One notable omission, however, is the victim. Crime victims are left to wait for extended periods of time while the inner machinations of the criminal justice system take their course. For sexual assault survivors in particular, this lack of follow up is incredibly frustrating. They feel left behind, confused, discouraged, and forgotten.
This disconnect may be attributed to the tensions between “vertical” or “horizontal” integration in the criminal justice system. In the former, the same individual remains with the case from beginning to end. Centralization of information means prolonged focus and attention, and greater opportunity for follow up. However, critics of vertical integration often point out that, in a world where caseloads number in the hundreds, having a vertical system is infeasible. Additionally, there are fewer opportunities for specialization. This can be particularly problematic in more serious and complex crimes such as sexual assault. In contrast, cases in a horizontal system pass through several different levels of scrutiny, with many different people playing individual roles. A single case may pass through four different units before resolving. While a horizontal regime allows for specialization and greater efficiency, it may come at the cost of greater transparency and the personal attention its rival offers.
The debate is not limited to attorneys’ offices. I spoke with a retired police officer from a large department with over 400 officers. He described a horizontal system for sexual assaults: Patrol officers conduct preliminary investigations before referring the case to detectives in the Child Abuse and Sexual Assault Unit. These detectives receive substantial training in sexual assault investigations. Once the case is handed off, the initial investigating officer likely doesn’t see it again.
For comparison, I spoke with a retired officer from a much smaller department. He explained that in his office, an officer often stayed with a case throughout the entire investigation. While there are specialized detectives available, the initial officer often has the opportunity to become the contact person for anything related to that case. Both officers indicated that all sexual assault reports are investigated, regardless of the statute of limitations. The decision to charge (or not) was up to the DA’s office. However, follow-up with victims of crime, including sexual assault survivors, was also up to the DA’s office.
The most frustrating conversation I had, however, was with a sexual assault trauma counselor. She agreed that follow-up with survivors was severely lacking, and this only contributed to the knowledge gap. For example, survivors are often discouraged from reporting because the statute of limitations has passed. When asked about this, the counselor responded, “There is no statute of limitations for resources. No matter how long ago the crime occurred, survivors are entitled to recovery and support even if the case doesn’t go to trial.” She explained that many survivors never knew this, and end up never seeking help because they think it’s too late.
This needs to change. Sexual assault survivors endure pervasive and chronic trauma after being attacked. Seeking justice should not contribute to this pain. In a system designed to bring justice to criminals, survivors are often the ones feeling punished. Navigating two distinct offices, each with distinct priorities, is daunting. While criminal justice is necessarily complex, there are several simple steps we can take to mitigate it. Regular follow-up with survivors and proactive education are but two examples. Greater vertical integration in both police and DA’s offices will ensure greater transparency and may also contribute to proactive education of resources available to survivors. If nothing else, survivors will feel more empowered if they understand why decisions are being made. For something as personal as sexual assault, this is the least we can do.