Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses
All the cases involved allegations of the crime of rape. To prove the crime, five elements need proof. First is penetration of the male sexual organ of the female sexual organ, regardless of the extent, but there are also jurisdictions that recognize penetration made by other body parts or objects. This makes rape traditionally gender specific or specific to women. Second is force by the perpetrator and resistance by the victim. Both are necessary to constitute evidence of rape since force and resistance reflects the lack of consent to the act. The force should be reasonable that average person would consider this a threat to their free will and the resistance by the victim should likewise be reasonably evident. The existence of resistance comprises a key consideration in investigations of rape. Third is non-consent or lack of consent, which means that the act is against the will of the victim, as opposed to consensual sex. In investigating this element, law enforcement officers consider a number of factors such as the relationship of the victim and suspect, the circumstances of the situation, the state of mind of the victim and suspect, and physical evidence. Fourth is marital exemption, which involves the consideration of the lack or existence of domestic relationship between the perpetrator and victim. However, many states have abolished this element to address the alleged bias against married women. Nevertheless, marital receives regard as less serious. Fifth is mens rea or mental state of the defendant. This means that the defendant should be aware of the lack of consent of the defendant and committed the act with knowledge or recognition of the act as reckless or criminal. (Bloch & Mcmunigal, 2005)
Based on these elements, a consideration of the cases independently shows that only Case Three, the complaint made by a woman of being raped in an alley while waiting for her bus. This was because her statement coincided with the statements of witnesses working at the bus station, medical and physical evidence also corroborated her story, and she positive identified the perpetrator. In the other cases, there was no physical evidence such as in Case One and Two. The other cases, Case Four and Five, some medical and physical evidence but the statements of the victim were uncorroborated or inconsistent. In Case Six, there were no other physical evidence in the crime scene but laboratory reports are still pending since the victim claimed being drugged. Case Seven does not contain detailed reports.
The case reports contained common elements including summary or brief of the subject of the investigation and the situation, the investigating officer, the steps taken upon receiving the call, statements of the victim and witnesses, evidence collected including medical reports and physical evidence, and the comments or conclusions to the report based on the opinion of the investigating officer (Bacigal, 2001). However, there were some cases lacking in some of these details such as medical or laboratory results, which could support the investigation even with inconsistencies in the statements of the victim or that of the victim with witnesses.
Initially, the first two cases appear to have involved false accusations of the suspect that appeared to be different person. However, by going through the rest of the cases collectively, a pattern appears, particularly rape as the crime reported and Richard Verduzco (also known as Ricky Verduzco or Rick). Although the cases involved separate incidents and unrelated victims, the pattern supports a change in impression towards the earlier cases appearing to be false accusations. There needs to be further investigation of the cases given the similar nature of the crime and the suspects identified by the victims. Seven cases of rape against a single suspect by assumed unrelated victims deserve further investigation.
Based on the consideration of the cases singly and collectively, the victim in Case Three and Case Six are telling the truth since evidence corroborated their statements but even in this case, there is yet a report on the processing of the rape kit and the victims dress. This means the rape happened but there is no other evidence pointing to Rick Verduzco as the suspect apart from the fact that both these women were with him during the reported rape incident. The evidence of rape and positive identification of Rick Veruduzco as the perpetrator could support criminal prosecution but waiting for the results of the laboratory tests would strengthen the case.
It was only during the seventh case that a semblance of collaboration in the investigation occurred. A recommended protocol would be to run a report against a database of resolved cases as well as records of pending investigations. In case of similar criminal reports involving the same suspect, the investigation should be coordinated on the suspect.
References
Bacigal, R. J. (2001). Criminal law & procedure: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: West Legal Studies.
Bloch, K. E., & Mcmunigal, K. C. (2005). Criminal law a contemporary approach: Cases, statutes, and problems. New York: Aspen Publishers.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment