Rape on College Campuses BRONX HIGH SCHOOL of

Rape on College Campuses BRONX HIGH SCHOOL of SCIENCE TEACHER: MARY VILLANI FORENSIC SCIENCE: SBF 5 -02 2001 -2002

THE PROBLEM • • The risk of being raped is four times greater for women aged 16 to 24 than any other age group. One in four college women surveyed are victims of rape or attempted rape. One out of every 15 college men reported attempting or committing a rape. Date rape drugs only cost approximately $1. 25 per pill. • • • 73% of those people who have been classified as raped do not think that they were raped. A startling 75% of all rape cases are committed by acquaintances of the victim. The victim might know the person by name, might know him from classes or school, or maybe just met him at a party. 42% of these rapes will never be reported.

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLE HAVING AT LEAST ONE VICTIMIZATION INCIDENT IN 1999 3

LOCATIONS OF RAPE INCIDENTS OVER A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD 4

AMOUNT OF RAPE INCIDENTS OVER A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD 5

THE CAUSES • The three causes of rape are victim precipitation, male pathology and male hostility. • A lack of information on how to avoid situations that are favorable to rape. • Experimentation with drugs and alcohol by 25% of all college students leads to poor judgement, and is one of the top causes of rape on college campuses. • Prior sexual and physical abuse (either observed or experienced within the family) affect both the victim and aggressor. • The fact that very few rapes (only 42%) get reported empowers the rapists, who then go on to commit more crimes. • Another possible cause of date rape can be linked to traditional "sex-roles. " Which includes the premise that the man makes the first move toward having sex. Men are naturally dominant and aggressive. 6

FINGERPRINT EVIDENCE • • • The ridges of a fingerprint are formed by the dermal papillae during fetal development and remain permanent throughout one’s lifetime. Fingerprints can be grouped into whorls, loops, and arches. Invisible prints are made by perspiration and other substances on the skin surface. They require development by a latent fingerprint examiner or physical science technician. Visible prints are made in soft pliable substances such as putty, modeling clay, etc. Fingerprints on non-porous surfaces tend to be more fragile since the oils can easily be wiped away or smudged. Porous surfaces tend to be better for lifting fingerprints since the oils form the skin are absorbed. 7

DETECTING & PROCESSING FINGERPRINT EVIDENCE • • • Super glue fuming is one method used to develop fingerprints. The glue is heated and the fumes are directed onto the surface so that a print forms. This method is especially useful in rape cases. Once a print is dusted, it is lifted analyzed. The ridge characteristics are compared to the control specimen. Powder is often used to lift prints from non-porous surfaces. Black and gray powders are mostly used, and each is applied to a contrasting surface. Latent fingerprints may be visualized by exposure to laser light. Precipitation contains numerous components that become flourescent when lit with a n argon-ion laser. The results are then photographed through specially selected film.

SHOEPRINT EVIDENCE • • • Shoeprints are routinely left behind at a crime scene in both print and impression forms. Prints are two-dimensional, while impressions are three-dimensional. Before lifting a shoeprint, photographs must be taken. Two-dimensional shoeprints (found on hard surfaces) should be lifted as if they were fingerprints. Certain surfaces may permit the use of an electrostatic lift. This device lifts impressions from porous and nonporous surfaces, but does not work if the impressions are wet or become wet. Casts should be made from threedimensional shoeprints (found on soft surfaces) using dental stone or a silicone casting material. The impression is first stabilized with a spray and then powdered to allow easy lifting.

COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE DURING THE MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF THE RAPE VICTIM • Physical evidence to be collected: – – – – vaginal swabs, oral and anal swabs, pubic combing, head and pubic hair controls, saliva sample, blood sample, fingerprint scrapings, all clothing.

ITEMS ROUTINELY COLLECTED FROM SUSPECTS • All clothing, • pubic hair combing, • forcibly removed head and pubic hair controls, • saliva and blood samples. 11

FORENSIC SEROLOGY • • An analysis must be performed on a stain to determine whether or not it is actually blood. If the sample is blood, the species must then be determined. Conventional serological analysis analyzes the proteins, enzymes, and antigens that are found in blood. If the blood sample is human, it goes on to further identification and then individualization. Blood analysis is a comparison analysis. The victim’s blood and the suspect’s blood must be compared to the blood found at the crime scene. Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) DNA analysis directly analyzes certain DNA sequences found in white blood cells. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) DNA analysis analyzes DNA sequences that have been replicated numerous times. This procedure works well with small samples of blood. It, however, cannot individualize a blood sample. Currently, United State courts do not accept blood evidence as something which can be absolutely linked to an individual. It can only be tied to a person with a high degree of probability.

IS THE RED STAIN BLOOD? – Benzidine color test, – Phenophthalein test, – Leukomylokite test, – Luminol test, – Microcrystalline test.

SEMINAL STAINS • Seminal stains found at a crime scene are collected with cotton swab and placed in an airtight container so that they may not be contaminated. • A spermatozoa search is a microscopic analysis where sperm cells are visually observed. • The acid phospatase is a presumptive analysis that test for the general existence of semen. • Anti P-30 is a quantitative and qualitative test that identifies the presence of protein P-30 (found only in human semen). This test may also serve to individualize seminal evidence. • DNA analysis to determine if the DNA pattern extracted from a crime scene semen stain matches the DNA pattern of the suspect: – RFLP, – PCR. 14

RFLP ANALYSIS OF SEMEN FOUND AT A CRIME SCENE • The restriction fragment length polymorphism or RFLP examines DNA sequences of base pairs in a section of a DNA strand with a high probability of being entirely unique to the donor. When a match is found, there is no question that the donor was at the scene of the crime. • Unfortunately, the RFLP requires many sample cells from the crime scene like several strands of hair, large splatters of blood, or large amounts of semen. The cells have to be “fresh”, too--that is, undamaged and recently dead.

PCR ANALYSIS OF SEMEN FOUND AT A CRIME SCENE • PCR, or polymerase chain reaction, isn’t quite as accurate. The test can be performed with minute crime scene samples, to, which helps investigators who have little physical evidence. • The PCR method involves copying the available DNA and analyzing only one specific gene, oftentimes the gene called HLA DQ alpha. • Geneticists look for certain types of the gene to determine matches. If no match is found, the donor was not at the crime scene. Matches are not conclusive, however, because many people may have the same types of a specific gene.

EVIDENCE COLLECTION POLICY • • • Evidence should be collected within 72 hours of the incident. Wet body fluids should be collected with a gauze pad, allow to air dry, then placed in a breathable paper bag. Dry fluids should be picked up with a moistened cloth. Fibers found must be placed in a sealed envelope. A garment should be kept separate from other objects and laid on a clean sheet of paper. All evidence must maintain the chain of custody.

COLLEGE POLICIES • Sex offenses may initially be reported to security officers, directors of physical plants and security, vice presidents of student affairs Dean of Students, or student health services. • Both the accuser and the accused are entitled to the same opportunities to have others present during disciplinary hearings. • Both the accuser and the accused shall be informed of the outcome of the any such disciplinary hearing. • All concerned are advised of the importance of preserving evidence which ultimately may be needed to prove criminal sexual assault. • If there is a reasonable likelihood to suspect that forcible criminal sexual assault has occurred on the college campus, the responsible official shall then contact their local New York Police Department precinct for assistance. 18

STATE POLICIES • • Students have the right to a fair hearing. Both the accused and the accuser may have an individual of their choice present to advise or support him or her. This individual may only provide support and may not actively participate in the hearing. Both the accused and the accuser may submit a written statement and request to the Office of Student Judicial Affairs that witnesses be called on their behalf. The college may call and question witnesses. During the hearing, both the accused and the accuser shall be given the opportunity to testify and present evidence. Both the accused and the accuser shall be provided with the outcome within 48 hours. If an accused student is found in violation and appeals, the accuser will be notified of further decisions. Sanctions to be imposed upon students by the university are varied and depend on the degree of severity of the violation. When sanctions are imposed, consideration will be given to the individual mitigating circumstances, as well as past actions. 19

FEDERAL POLICIES • • • The Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990, requires colleges and universities to automatically provide current students and staff with basic campus crime statistics and security policies. The Campus Sexual Assault Victims’ Bill of Rights of 1992, requires colleges and universities to afford campus sexual assault survivors certain basic rights, including assistance in notifying the police. The Foley Amendment of 1998 made the final results of student disciplinary cases where a student has been found to have broken a school rule in association with a crime of violence or non-forcible sex offense no longer protected from disclosure under federal student privacy laws. The Jeanne Cleary Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act of 1998 amended the 1990 Campus Security Act. It eliminated loopholes and expand reporting requirements. Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act of 2000 provided for the collection and disclosure of information about convicted and registered sex offenders either enrolled or employed by institutions of higher education. 20

THE MOST EFFECTIVE & FEASIBLE POLICY • • Education programs on security and rape. Warnings of dangerous areas on campus. Simple reporting procedures. Immediate contact of law enforcement agencies. • Greater penalties for offenders. • Distribution of campus safety reports. • A 24 -hour/7 days-a-week hotline. 21

REFERENCES • The Problem: – webpages. marshall. edu/~pressman 1/rap e. html – www. vix. com/men/falsereport/daterape/ gilbert, html – www. printz. usm. edu/features/1123 rape. html – www. geocities. com/sapacmu/statistics. h tm – abcnews. go. com/sections/us/dailynews/ campusrape 010126. html • The Causes: – www. printz. usm. edu/features/1123 rape. html – www. mincava. umn. edu/warters. htm – www. cnn. com/us/9709. 17/rape/drugs/ – www. ufcws. org/pubs/familytimes/dater ape. html – Fingerprint Evidence: • http: //www. thrissurpolice. com/organi sation/specialcells. htm • http: //onin. com/fp/lpcollection. html • http: //kancrn. kckps. k 12. ks. us/northw est/kavaver/Fingerprints. html • http: //members. aol. com/dbarnesphd/l atskin. htm • http: //www. optel. com. pl/article/engli sh/article 2. htm • http: //www. rit. edu/~vjrnts/forensics/l abs/lab 3. html • http: //www. eecs. umich. edu/mathscie nce/funexperiments/agesubject/lesso ns/prints. html • http: //www. e-fingerprints. net/ • http: //www. state. ar. us/crimelab/finge rprint. html • http: //www. llcc. il. us/justice/forens ic/latentprints. html

REFERENCES • Shoeprint Evidence: – www. poliisi. fi/wgm/shoeprin. htm – forensic. to/links/pages/Forensic_Scienc es/Field_of_expertise/ Toolmarks_shoeprints_locks/ – www. fbi. gov/hq/lab/handbook/examsho e. htm – home 2. pi. be/volckery/Library_Shoeprin ts. htm – www. bvda. com/EN/sect 3/en_3_6 a. html – www. fmedsci. com/links/forensic 315. htm – www. corpa. com/links/Forensic_Science s/Toolmarks_Shoeprints_Locks/ – Forensic Serology: • http: //www. thrissurpolice. com/organi sation/specialcells. htm • http: //onin. com/fp/lpcollection. html • http: //kancrn. kckps. k 12. ks. us/northw est/kavaver/Fingerprints. html • http: //members. aol. com/dbarnesphd/l atskin. htm • http: //www. optel. com. pl/article/engli sh/article 2. htm • http: //www. rit. edu/~vjrnts/forensics/l abs/lab 3. html • http: //www. eecs. umich. edu/mathscie nce/funexperiments/agesubject/lesso ns/prints. html • http: //www. e-fingerprints. net/ • http: //www. state. ar. us/crimelab/finge rprint. html • http: //www. llcc. il. us/justice/forens ic/latentprints. html

REFERENCES • Seminal Stains: – www. geneticid. com/we 3004. htm – www. vetsci. sdstate. edu/xnews/submiss. ht ml – www. crestwoodbabies. com/semenanalysis. cfm – www. fertility-docs. com/sperm_eval. phtml – www. derma. unijena. de/03 forsch/labors/lbandro. html – bioinformatics. weizmann. ac. il/mb/bioguide /pcr/contents. html – www. ornl. gov/hgmis/elsi/forensics. html – www. firearmsid. com/KSP%20 Evidence% Manual/Biological%20 Evidence. htm – www. ecc. mo. us – www. med. utah. edu/andrology/photo_galler y. html – www. astm. org/JOURNAL/FORENSIC/PA GES/672. htm • Policy: – www. udel. edu/Exec. VP/polprod/4 -46. htm – www. coppin. edu/policy/rules/sexual_assau lt. asp – www. emerson. edu/student_life/dean/rasp. h tml – www. naz. edu/dept/security_safety/policy. h tml – www. jsu. edu/depart/upd/csa. html – www. uq. edu – www. chapman. edu/studlife/safety – www. columbia. edu/cu/facets/9 -98/54. html – www. rad-systems/com – www. cloudccc. ks. us/security. ht m – www. brevard. edu. campus_life/ferpa. html – web. bsu. edu/housing/policies/violence. html – www. campussecurity. org – www. csun. edu/~shcenter/alert/sapol. html

REFERENCES • • Lab Policy: – www. genticid. com/we 03004. htm – www. bigate. com/~endabuse/html/right. html Evidence Collection: – www. crime-sceneinvestigator. net/collect. html

REFERENCES: IMAGES • • Title Page: – www. cnn. com/us/9911/24/amherst. rapes/ Problem: – • www. bgky. org/ crimestatistics. htm – campusafety. org – www. ncirs. org/pdffiles 1/nij/182369. pdf – http: //www. newu. uci. edu/archive/2000 -2001/fall/001120/archive-001120. html Fingerprints: – www. hibernisbank. com/…/hb-identity-idex. shtml – rleweb. mit. edu/groups/g-sen. htm – www. ncis. navy. milllocations/San. Diego/forensicslab. htm – www. uwrf. edu/~sj 83/ – www. detectoprint. com/default. htm – www. tritechusa. com/crime/latentkits. htm – www. crimelibrary. com/forensics/crime/6. htm 26

REFERENCES: IMAGES • • Shoeprints: – http: //www. fbi. gov/hq/lab/handbook/examshoe. htm#Lifting%20 Two-Dimensional%20 Impressions Collection of Evidence: – • Items Collected from Suspect: – • • www. crime-scene. com/ecpi/ serology_drug. html www. carleton. ca/jmc/cnews/ 01122000/n 5. htm Seminal Stains: – http: //www. med. utah. edu/andrology/photo_gallery. html RFLP Analysis: – http: //www. mdch. state. mi. us/pha/bofl/Div. Inf. Dis/MEpi. Ut. htm • PCR Analysis: • www. barc. usda. gov/ psi/fl/pcr. jpg • Evidence Collection: – www. redwop. com/product. asplpl. D=2065 Serology: – www. unh. edu/nhvd/serolog. htm – www. state. sd. us/doh/images/serology%20 test%20 photo. jpg • 27

BRONX HIGH SCHOOLOF SCIENCE 2002 • • TEACHER: MARY VILLANI STUDENT LEADER/COORDINATORS: – – – • ERICA FUTTERMAN YOON JI KIM TANESHA MCFARLANE PRODUCTION STAFF: – – – AMSTER, LAUREN ARBITMAN, CARLY ARIAS, DIANA BLUE, NATIRA BOECKMAN, SARAH BOYD, NYJHA CHAN, YING YEE CHEN, DAVID DOMINGUEZ, EMANUEL ESPINAL, RAYMOND HO, DONNA • • • • • LASHLEY, KATE MA, VIVIAN MALDONADO, MICHELENE MARIANSKI, ADAM MARTINEZ, RICARDO MELOY, DANIEL MOON, SAMUEL QUINN, JAY RAGUSA, JESSICA RIENECKER, JESSICA SANTKOVSKY, INNA SINGH, NALYNIE SINGH, SARASWATI SUN, LINDA TECHARATANAPRAS, SUTEE WANG, AMY WILLIS-ARONOWIT, NONA WONG, JAMES WU, CONG ZIV, MAYA