Table Of Content

* UMASS/AMHERST * Final Report of the Massachusetts Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kit Analysis Project A Project Funded by a ViolenceAgainst Women Act Grant Lisa S. McGovern, J.D. Project Director Massachusetts District Attorneys Association One Bulfinch Place Suite 202 Boston, Massachusetts 021 14 February, 2000 Digitized by the Internet Archive 2014 in https://archive.org/details/finalreportofniasOOnicgo TheMassachusettsDistrictAttorneysAssociation is theprofessionalassociation ofthe eleven electedprosecutors in the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts. Lisa McGovern, the author, was hiredas a consultantby theMassachusettsDistrict AttorneysAssociation toproduceandconducta study oftheMassachusettsSexual AssaultEvidence Collection Kit Shewasformerly anAssistantDistrictAttorney in Middlesex County. In 1997sheauthored TheMassachusettsProsecutors'Manualfor Domestic Violence andSexualAssault, aprojectfundedby V.A.W.A. in cooperation with theMassachusetts DistrictAttorneysAssociation andthe Office oftheAttorney Generalforthe Commonwealth ofMassachusetts. She may be reachedat herhome office: P.O. Box 257, Prides Crossing, MA 01965, or via mcgovernl@aoLcom. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS THENATUREANDSCOPE OFTHEPROJECT 1. 1 2. BACKGROUNDINFORMATION 3 2.1. Developmentofthe Massachusetts Sexual AssaultEvidence Collection Kit.............3 2.2. Developmentofthe SexualAssaultNurse Examiner Program..................................5 FEEDBACKFROMPROSECUTORS ONTHE MERITSAND 5. SHORTCOMINGSOFTHEKIT. 9 3.1. Use and Value ofthe Kit 9 3.2. Prosecutors' Relationshipwith the Crime Labs 1 3.3. Defense Challenges to the Kit 12 3.4. Steps Which Could be Added 13 3.5. Additional ProtocolWhich Could be Developed 13 3.6. Concerns forVictims 14 3.7. Concerns aboutOtherParties' Roles in the KitProtocol 14 3.8. Issues Concerning the KitForms 15 3.9. Access to the KitForms 18 3.10. Access to the Crime Lab's Report 18 OTHER FEEDBACKONTHE 4. KIT. 19 4.1. From Crime Laboratory Personnel. 19 4.2. From Medical Providers and Examiners 21 4.3. From Law Enforcement 23 4.4. From Victim Advocates andVictim ServiceAgencies 14 5. CHANGESIMPLEMENTEDINDECEMBER 1999 25 5.1. Changes to the Kit's Instructions 25 5.2. Changes to the Kit*s Forms 2S 5.3. Changes to Improve Sample Quality and/orAddress Forensic Needs.......... 29 5.4. Changes to Improve the Experience forthe Victim 31 5.5. Changes to Improve Integrity in Sealing andTransporting Evidence 33 5.6. Changes to Address Ease ofUse and/orCostIssues 33 6. RECOMMENDATIONS: MSAECKITADVISORYBOARDPROCEDURES....35 6.1. Establish a CalendarforAnnual Review and Procurement 35 6.2. Enhance Communication ofthe Board Work 56 7. RECOMMENDATIONS: ISSUES TOBERESOLVED BYTHEM.S.A.E.C. KIT ADVISORYBOARD 38 7.1. Possible Changes to rtie PresentContents and/or Protocol 38 7.2. PossibleAdditions to the Kit's Contents and/orProtocol 40 7.3. Possible Changes to the Forms Accompanying the Kit. 45 7.4. Evaluations and Assessments 48 RECOMMENDATIONS: DISTRIBUTIONPROCEDURES 50 8. 8.1. Data CoOection 50 8.2. Delivery, Inventoryand Storage 50 RECOMMENDATIONS: TRAININGMATERIALSAND OPPORTUNITIES...52 9. 9.1. Prior Training Sessions and Materials 52 9.2. Future Training Needs 52 10. APPENDIXES 54 10.1. ListofProsecutors Interviewed; Survey Guide Form 55 10.2. MSAEC KitInstructions Prior to Dec 1999 Changes 56 10.3. NEW MSAEC KIT INSTRUCTIONS 57 10.4. MSAEC Kit Forms Prior to Dec. 1999Changes 58 10.5. SANE Forms, Dec. 1999 59 10.6. NEW MSAEC KTT FORMS 1-6 60 10.7. NEW FORM: Consentfor ComprehensiveToxicology Testing 61 10.8. Original and Revised Versions ofthe Provider Sexual Crime Report.................62 10.9. Requisition Specifications forthe December 1999 MSAEC Kit 63 10.10. Requisition Specifications for the New Toxicology Kit.... 64 10.11. Specifications forA Generic KitforCollecting Samples from Suspects. 65 10.12. Specifications fora Disposable Drying Rack................ 66 ii THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE PROJECT Inthelate 1980s, ateamofemergencyroomnurses, crimelaboratorypersonnel, and prosecutors collaboratedto developa standardprocedureinMassachusettsforcollectingevidencein sexual assauh cases reportingto hospital emergencydepartments. Thegroup createdtheMassachusetts SexualAssaultEvidenceCoUecticmKit (MSAEC Kit), whichtodatehasbeenf>rocuredand distributedto hospitals statewide, freeofcharge, bytheProgramsDivision oftheExecutiveOffice ofPublic Safety(EOPS). Thekit providesaprotocolthatguidesho^ital personnel throughatime consuming, multi-stepprocessinvolvingthe collection, preservation, and documentation of evidencesuchasbodilyfluidsand hairsamples. Local poUcetransportthecompleted kitstothe Bostonand SatePoliceCrimeLaboratories, foranalysisand subsequentuseincriminal prosecutions. Inthefall of1998 Rai Cunningham, who wasthenthe ViolenceAgainstWomenActProgram DirectoratEOPS andDirectoroftheMSAEC Kit Program, suggestedthattheMassachusetts District AttorneysAssociation(MDAA) considerconductingananalysisoftheMSEAC Kit. The MassachusettsDistrict Attorneys Associationistheprofessional associationoftheelevenelected prosecutorsinthe CommonwealthofMassachusetts. Majorprograms oftheassociationinclude traimngassistant district attorneys, advocatesandother stafiF; establi^iingamodemcase management system statewide; andoverseeinglegislativeandcourtrelatedinitiativestoimprove resourcesforMassachusetts'sprosecutors. MDAA'sbriefreviewrevealedthatthekit'scontentsandprotocol shouldbeexaminedindepth; First, despitethekit's critical roleintheidentificationandprosecution ofrapists, andthekit's influenceindeterminingthenatureofthe caregivento sexual assault survivorsin emergency departments, noonehad conductedacomprehensiveevaluationofthekitsinceitsinception overadecadeago. Second, theBostonCrimeLab had recentlyconvertedtoDNAanalysis, and the StateCrime Labwasintheprocess ofchangingitsprotocolstoDNAanalysis, affectingthetypesof samplesthat shouldbecollected. Third, certain stepsinthekit hadgenerated concernand controversy. Fourth, no record ofthekit'sgoalsand contributionsexistedthat could assist in securingfunds eachyearforprocurement anddistribution. Fifth, no procedureexisted to facilitateinputfrom amyriad ofinterestedand involved agencies ~ and associations medical, scientific andlegal. Sixth, differenthospitalsand examinerswereusingthekitsin differentways, and asaresult, thecrimelaboratorieswerenotreceivingtheuniform, standardsamplesthekitwascreatedto produce. TheMassachusettsDistrict AttorneysAssociation applied forand received aoneyeargrant award fromthe ServicesTrainingOfl5cersProsecutors(S T OP.)V.A.W.A. FormulaGrantProgram, authorizedbytheViolence AgainstWomenAct of1994, to conduct acomprehensiveanalysis of theMassachusetts Sexual AssaultEvidenceCollectionKit. IngatheringinformationintheearUest stagesoftheproject, attentionwasimmediatelydrawnto the efforts ofthe SexualAssaultNurseExaminerProgramattheDepartment ofPublicHealth. (Forbackground informationon SANE, see section2.2, below.) SANEhad anadvisoryboard in place, comprised ofprofessionalsfiDm several fields, to provideguidanceonthestandards ofcare for sexual assaultpatientscared forby SANEnurses. The SANEBoard also had committeesin placeaddressingtwocriticalkit issues: thedevelopmentofapediatricprotocol andtoxicology testingprocedures. SANEProgramDirectorLuciaZunigaenthusiasticallywelcomedtheKit 1