U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

64–687 PDF 2011

S. HRG. 111–891 

RAPE IN THE UNITED STATES: THE CHRONIC 

FAILURE TO REPORT AND INVESTIGATE RAPE 

CASES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 

Serial No. J–111–107 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

(II) 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

EDWARD E. KAUFMAN, Delaware 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

BRIAN A. BENZCOWSKI, Republican Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

EDWARD E. KAUFMAN, Delaware 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

HANNIBAL KEMERER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

WALT KUHN, Republican Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 132 

Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 1 

WITNESSES 

Berkowitz, Scott, President and Founder, Rape, Abuse, and Incest National 

Network (RAINN, Washington, DC .................................................................... 28 

Carbon, Susan B., Director, Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC ....................................................................... 2 

Dempsey, Michelle Madden, Associate Professor of Law, Villanova University 

School of Law, Villanova, Pennsylvania ............................................................. 32 

Kilpatrick, Dean G., Distinguished University Professor, Vice Chair for Education, Department of Psychiatry, Director, National Crime Victims Research & Treatment Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina .............................................................................................. 26 

Ramsey, Charles H., Commissioner, Philadelphia Police Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania .......................................................................................... 14 

Ravira, LaWanda, Director, National Council on Crime and delinquency, Center for Girls and Young Women, Jacksonville, Florida ..................................... 21 

Reedy, Sara R., Bulter Pennsylvania ..................................................................... 16 

Smeal, Eleanor Cutri, Feminist Majority Foundation, Arlington, Virginia ........ 30 

Tracy Carol E., Women’s Law Project, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ................... 12 

Weil, Julie, Jupiter, Florida .................................................................................... 18 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

Responses of Susan B. Carbon to questions submitted by Senator Specter ....... 37 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Berkowitz, Scott, President and Founder, Rape, Abuse, and Incest National 

Network (RAINN, Washington, DC, statement ................................................. 43 

Carbon, Susan B., Director, Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, statement .................................................... 55 

Dempsey, Michelle Madden, Associate Professor of Law, Villanova University 

School of Law, Villanova, Pennsylvania, statement and attachment .............. 67 

Kilpatrick, Dean G., Distinguished University Professor, Vice Chair for Education, Department of Psychiatry, Director, National Crime Victims Research & Treatment Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, statement and attachment ............................................... 82 

Ramsey, Charles H., Commissioner, Philadelphia Police Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, statement ....................................................................... 133 

Ravira, LaWanda, Director, National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 

Center for Girls and Young Women, Jacksonville, Florida, statement ........... 136 

Reedy, Sara R., Bulter Pennsylvania, statement .................................................. 147 

Rumburg, Delilah, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape, 

National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Enola, Pennsylvania, statement 227 

Smeal, Eleanor Cutri, Feminist Majority Foundation, Arlington, Virginia, 

statement .............................................................................................................. 237 

Tracy Carol E., Women’s Law Project, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, statement 

and attachment .................................................................................................... 245 

Weil, Julie, Jupiter, Florida, statement ................................................................. 267 

(1) 

RAPE IN THE UNITED STATES: THE CHRONIC 

FAILURE TO REPORT AND INVESTIGATE 

RAPE CASES 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

WASHINGTON, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:25 p.m., in room 

SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Arlen Specter, 

Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Specter, Cardin, and Klobuchar. 

Also Present: Senator Franken. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ARLEN SPECTER, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Chairman SPECTER. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The 

Criminal Law Subcommittee will now proceed with the hearing on 

the subject of rape. 

This hearing has been requested by the Women’s Law Project following an extensive series of articles by newspapers in many leading United States cities commenting about the inaccuracies on reports of rape, raising serious questions as to whether there are adequate steps being taken by police departments to catalogue the 

complaints, to investigate them, and to make the determination 

when rape, in fact, occurred. 

The statistics are staggering. Over 20 million women, or 18 percent of all women in the United States, have been victims of rape, 

and each year approximately 1,100,000 more women are victims of 

rape. The statistics show that 28 percent of the forcible rapes have 

victims under the age of 12, and 27 percent of forcible rape victims 

are in the ages of 12 to 17. Reportedly, only 18 percent of forcible 

rapes are reported to the police. 

When I took a look at these statistics, I wondered how they were 

gathered and how accurate they were on a subject this sensitive. 

And I am advised that the studies conducted in 1990 and the year 

2005, the National Women’s Study and the National Women’s 

Study Replication, are reliable statistics following state-of-the-art 

survey techniques when interviewing women that are markedly 

more sensitive and accurate than used in other surveys, including 

the Government’s National Crime Victimization Survey. 

There have been a series of articles in the major United States 

newspapers: the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Baltimore Sun, the St. 

Louis Post-Dispatch, the New York Times, the New Orleans TimesVerDate Nov 24 2008 09:54 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 064724 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\64687.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
2 

Picayune, the Village Voice, and This American Life on National 

Public Radio. The Philadelphia experience showed that there were 

approximately one-third of all sex crimes reported in Philadelphia 

which were not investigated by the police, that there was an audit 

conducted, and it showed that some 2,300 sexual assault cases had 

been incorrectly handled. The Philadelphia Police Department 

changed their approach to bring in women’s advocacy groups to review the files using transparency and requiring that, before a matter was reported as unfounded, it be filed by two police officers. 

As I have taken a look at these statistics, I found that times 

have not changed very much since the days when I was an assistant district attorney some years ago. And when I was elected district attorney in 1965, I instituted a change in procedures and established a special rape unit. At that time rape complainants were 

interviewed in a regular detective room where they had a series of 

a dozen or more desks. Witnesses were interviewed within hearing 

range of many, many other people, not very conducive to telling 

about an incident like being the victim of a rape. And I changed 

that policy to have interviews privately conducted. 

At that time there were no photographs taken to preserve evidence of trauma, no brushings on the issue of pubic hair, and a 

great many changes were undertaken. And it looks to me like it is 

still a big, big issue, so we are moving ahead with this hearing this 

afternoon to focus public attention to see what is going on and to 

see what changes ought to be made. 

For starters, I note that the definition of rape which is being 

used by the FBI is antiquated, not inclusive as where it ought to 

be. 

I will turn now to our first witness who is the Director of the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women. In this 

role, she serves as liaison between the Department and Federal 

and State governments on crimes of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking. She likes to be called director 

as opposed to judge, but she is the supervisory judge of the New 

Hampshire Judicial Family Branch and has been since 1996, a 

member of the Governor’s Commission on Domestic and Sexual Violence, and chaired New Hampshire’s Domestic Violence Fatality 

Review Committee; a graduate of the University of Wisconsin and 

DePaul University College of law. 

Welcome, Director Carbon. The floor is yours for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN B. CARBON, DIRECTOR, OFFICE 

ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. CARBON. Good afternoon, Senator Specter. It is an honor to 

be here this afternoon. I would like to thank you and I would like 

to thank the Committee for conducting this hearing today to draw 

attention to the dehumanizing issue of sexual assault and how this 

dangerous crime is treated in our country. 

As the Committee knows well, sexual assault is a complex crime 

that affects every sector of our society. Children—girls and boys— 

are molested by family members; college freshmen are date raped; 

and the elderly are attacked in their homes. Sexual assault knows 

3 

no gender, geographic location, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation. 

None of us is immune, but all of us are responsible to end it. 

The challenge that we face is to meet the needs of an incredibly 

diverse population of victims while at the same time prosecuting offenders for these heinous crimes. A fundamental obstacle to addressing sexual assault is the reluctance to talk about it. We are 

uncomfortable talking about incest or thinking that our grandmothers could be raped. Myths and misconceptions abound, not the 

least of which is that real rape is committed only by strangers 

wielding weapons in dark alleys. To the contrary, most victims 

know their attackers, no weapons are used, and alcohol and drugs 

are frequently involved. 

These misconceptions do not stop at the doors of the police department, the prosecutor’s office, or the courtroom. They impact the 

way that all of us respond to sexual violence, and this must be 

changed. 

To bring justice for victims and accountability for perpetrators, 

we must move the national conscience through meaningful dialog. 

Today’s hearing is a step in the right direction, and we commend 

the U.S. Congress for its leadership toward this moral imperative. 

In my testimony today, I hope to provide a broader context for 

the scope of sexual assault and our collective responses to it. 

First, it is difficult to quantify the crime. Studies use different 

definitions of rape and different data collection methods. Some include only forcible rape or only rape that is reported to law enforcement. 

Our terminology is confusing as well. Sometimes we talk about 

rape, sometimes sexual assault, other times sexual violence. That 

being said, researchers estimate that about 18 percent of women in 

the United States report having been raped at some point in their 

lives. 

For some populations, rapes or sexual violence are even higher. 

Nearly one in three—and I repeat, nearly one in three—American 

Indian or Alaska Native women will be sexually assaulted in her 

lifetime. 

Sexual assault is also one of the most underreported crimes in 

America. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that the majority 

of rapes and sexual assaults of women and girls between 1992 and 

2000 were not reported to law enforcement. Reasons for not reporting included fear of not being believed, a lack of trust in the criminal justice system, fear of retaliation or embarrassment, being too 

traumatized to report, or self-blame and guilt. 

Second, there are dramatic differences in the way that police departments, prosecutors’ offices, and even courts respond to this 

crime across the country. Some communities have highly trained, 

coordinated teams of primary and secondary responders from 

health, law enforcement, legal, and victims services sectors. However, as you are going to be hearing from subsequent panels this 

afternoon, in other places victims are subjected to humiliating interrogations and are treated with suspicion by law enforcement. 

Collected evidence may sit for months or even years without being 

analyzed. In some areas of the country, there simply are no services. 

4 

It is a matter of absolute national integrity that we improve the 

criminal justice response to sexual violence. But let me be clear 

when I say so. We cannot simply focus on one element of the criminal justice system, whether it be law enforcement, prosecution, 

courts, or juries, and expect to fix the problem. Instead, we must 

examine what about our system it is that keeps victims from reporting these crimes. 

When the Violence Against Women Act was passed 16 years ago, 

sexual violence was included, but it took a back seat to domestic 

violence. It is time that we devote the same intense level of public 

awareness, services, and training to address this insidious problem 

as we have with domestic violence. Victims of sexual assault deserve no less. 

With support from Congress, OVW is funding for its second year 

the Sexual Assault Services Program, the first Federal funding 

stream solely dedicated to providing direct services to survivors of 

sexual assault. We have awareness and prevention campaigns and 

programs on campuses across the country. We also have law enforcement training programs, and we are working to provide protocols and training for sexual assault nurse examiners and training 

in tribal communities as well. We are training advocates, prosecutors, and judges as well, but much remains to be done. 

When I started at OVW 5 months ago, I came with a list of priorities that I hoped would be embraced by our office and the Department, and they have been. At the top of our list are prevention and 

ending sexual violence. We are committed to creating a culture 

where victims are safe to report the crime, where they will be 

treated with respect by all those with whom they come into contact, 

and where perpetrators will be held accountable. 

I want to thank the Committee for being at the forefront of ensuring that the devastating crime of sexual assault receives the serious attention that it deserves. Thank you for your time this afternoon. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Carbon appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Well, thank you, Director Carbon. 

When you talk about reasons for not reporting rape and you comment that people are uncomfortable talking about rape, why do you 

think that is so? In our society, where there is so much generalized 

talk about sex and so much that is pervasive even in the public 

media, why should that persist, people being embarrassed to talk 

about this subject? 

Ms. CARBON. You are absolutely right. The subject of sex is 

talked about a lot, but the concept of sexual violence is not discussed. People have a hard time understanding the nature of sexual violence, and we have a tendency when we talk about it to 

blame the victim for having caused it. 

We have a culture in which in many respects we condone violence, and women—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Pause for a moment on the issue of concern 

by the victim that the victim would be charged with having caused 

it. Why should that be the case? 

Ms. CARBON. Let me share, if I may, a story that I recall from 

my days in Wisconsin many years ago. There was a trial of a young 

5 

woman, 18 years old, on the college campus of the University of 

Wisconsin at Madison, and she accused an individual of raping her, 

and the trial ensued, and the judge—the judge—accused the 

woman of inviting the rape because at that time she was wearing 

a short skirt. And this judge, it turns out, happened to be recalled, 

which is a very unusual process. Many States do not even provide 

for it. But this judge was recalled by the Wisconsin electorate because of their outrage that the judge was blaming the victim for 

what she was wearing. 

That story has resonated with me ever since, and this is probably 

35 years ago. We tend to look at victims and hold them responsible. 

Did they walk somewhere they should not have walked? Did they 

have a drink at a bar? Did they go home with somebody they 

should not have gone with? And we look at what the victim did. 

We do not look at what the perpetrator did. 

Chairman SPECTER. Let me move on to your comment about concerns about prevention of sexual violence. That, of course, is an entirely different phase from reporting and investigating and prosecuting. What ideas would you have on the subject of prevention? 

Ms. CARBON. In my view, when I talk about sexual violence, I 

talk about the trilogy, if you will: the need for prevention, effective 

prevention; effective intervention when we provide services; and 

then treatment. We have talked so much over time about the appropriate services when we intervene in a crime, but I think that 

it is time that we rewind that script and come back to start preventing sexual violence so that we will prevent victims from ever 

becoming victims. 

We have a number of prevention programs through some of our 

grants, through the Rural grant, for example—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Tell us about your ideas on how you prevent 

sexual violence. 

Ms. CARBON. I think we need a broad-based public awareness 

and education campaign to begin with. I think we need to change 

the cultural mores and the cultural values and our attitudes. 

Chairman SPECTER. Awareness of what? People are aware of 

what rape means, and people are aware that it is violent and antisocial. So how do you prevent it? 

Ms. CARBON. We prevent it by educating people about the fact 

that rape is a crime and about sexual assault being a crime. People 

get very confused with mixed messages that we send when we look 

at the media, when we look at sports, when we look at entertainment, and we see women in very degrading roles. We assume then 

that women are inviting this when indeed they are not. 

Chairman SPECTER. In the limited time I have remaining, let me 

move to another subject, and that is, the role of women’s organizations in checking on police practices. We are going to hear from the 

Philadelphia Police Commissioner later that they have programs of 

transparency, where women’s groups come in and review files to 

make an independent determination. 

Now, there is nothing like oversight to have people on their toes 

in the discharging of their official duties. How would you fashion 

a program where a women’s organization, which we have in all of 

the big cities, many small towns, structure a program of working 

6 

with the police department and having women take a look at the 

files to comment? 

Ms. CARBON. I believe you soon will be hearing in more detail 

from those organizations which are doing it this afternoon. But I 

can relate from a perspective from a court standpoint. I have not 

been privy to how they have actually run the program with law enforcement. But by opening our records, the principle of having open 

access to our files without violating confidentiality is an important 

way that we as public officials, whether we are in the court system 

or law enforcement, can be held accountable for what we do. And 

by reviewing the files, by assessing the testimony—not the testimony but the evidence that is in the files to determine whether 

there is a basis for prosecution is one good way. 

Through all of the work that we do under the Violence Against 

Women Act, we talk about a coordinated community response. So 

anytime we can bring in partnerships to help improve the work, 

bring in advocates to work with those professionals, I think we get 

a better outcome and more safety for victims. 

Chairman SPECTER. The red light went on during your answer, 

so I will turn now to Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, first, Chairman Specter, I want to thank 

you for holding this hearing. I think one of the most important 

functions of our Committee is to oversee what is happening on the 

enforcement of our laws. And, yes, while most of the prosecutions 

and investigations for sexual assaults will be done at the State and 

local level; it is important that the Senate provide the oversight to 

make sure our laws are being handled in an appropriate manner. 

I am convinced that sexual assaults prosecutions are at a much 

lower number than other criminal activities, and that we are not 

doing an appropriate job nationwide on helping those that are victimized in reporting the incident, investigating it, and prosecuting 

it. And when you look at the numbers, there is reason to be concerned. 

In Baltimore, we had the highest rate of unfounded cases in the 

Nation. Now, when you determine at the police level there is an 

unfounded case, it generally means that you do not believe the victim. And there is really no evidence to support the numbers that 

we had in Baltimore. 

The Baltimore Sun put a spotlight on this. As a result, there was 

action and attention was paid, and all of a sudden, the number of 

cases have gone up dramatically in Baltimore—not because there 

are more cases, but because they are now treating it the way it 

should be, at least starting to do that. 

So I guess my question for you is: What are you doing in order 

to try to see whether we can get accurate information nationwide, 

that we have a common set of information as to the number of 

cases that are being followed up, that there is adequate training 

through local police to handle this, how you are helping set up the 

response teams that are necessary to help victims during these extremely difficult times, so that we have a common set of numbers 

nationwide in order to be able to set up the right programs here 

at the national level to assist local law enforcement to help those 

who have been victimized through sexual assaults, and to make 

sure those who are perpetrators are held accountable? 

7 

Ms. CARBON. Those are great questions, and this is obviously the 

subject of the hearing here today. We have at OVW many different 

technical assistance providers and many training programs for all 

of the various professions, but in particular on law enforcement, we 

have a number of programs that are designed to educate sort of 

both tiers, from the top down and the bottom up. We have training 

programs for police chiefs through the International Association of 

Chiefs of Police, IACP. We have other programs through Ending 

Violence Against Women and many other technical assistance providers that have training curricula, whether it is online or live 

training, to teach line officers about how to investigate cases and 

how to report, understanding how to conduct interviews, understanding how to clear cases. 

One of the most important things we can do is to have a common 

understanding around terminology, because different States and 

different police departments define different crimes in a different 

way. So I would urge that there be some common terminology so 

that we can compare apples and apples and oranges and oranges 

as we go through. That is one of the challenges we have that it 

would be helpful to be addressed. 

Senator CARDIN. I think that is a recommendation we need to 

take a very close look at, because I understand that in some jurisdictions they might take a sexual assault and classify it as just an 

aggravated assault. It may be at different levels, and there one different definitions that are used, and that is something we need to 

have a better understanding of. But what concerns me is whether 

we have the numbers as to how police departments record unfounded reports they do not follow up on. Do you have any statistical information that could help us as to whether certain jurisdictions are just dismissing out of hand complaints that are being 

filed on a very arbitrary basis? Do we have any information to be 

able to take a look at what is happening? There are so many cases 

in which the police are brought in and they are not even sent out 

to investigate. They are not even sending cases over to a detective 

or to the prosecutors; decisions are being made by the responding 

police officer not to take it any further. 

Now, in Baltimore, they are requiring reports to be filed, so now 

we are at least getting second looks at these cases to make sure 

that there is a follow-up. I am concerned that in other areas of this 

Nation that they may not be hitting the radar screen. 

Ms. CARBON. There is research to suggest that the number of 

truly unfounded cases is somewhere between 2 and 10 percent or 

2 and 7 percent. So the number of truly unfounded is very small. 

Some of the steps that they are taking in law enforcement agencies 

around the country are to do what you are suggesting, and that is, 

No. 1, that we document that there is a report of every incident, 

instead of just holding the case and not report anything. We found 

it very helpful to require that law enforcement officers document 

the event, that they report what has actually happened, and that 

they then have a supervisor review the report to ensure that there 

either is evidence to go forward or not, but what additional steps 

would need to be taken. 

So with those additional reporting requirements coupled with 

much more intensive training, we are going to get a better outVerDate Nov 24 2008 09:54 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 064724 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\64687.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
8 

come. And kudos to the departments that are willing to do this, because by doing so you are undoubtedly going to see a rise in the 

numbers that are reported. There may not be a difference in the 

crime rate because we are actually disclosing what has been happening but has been hidden from public view. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, I agree with that. I think it is very important. I think we have to have a common set of numbers. We have 

to know what is happening. And unless there is a consistent interpretation of these reports as to whether they should be investigated 

and recommended for prosecution, then we really do not have a 

good grip on what is happening nationwide. 

Ms. CARBON. You are exactly right. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you, Senator Cardin. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for organizing this 

very important hearing and for allowing me to attend. I am not on 

the Subcommittee, but you opened it to every member of the Judiciary Committee. 

Director Carbon, I want to talk about rape kits. As you mentioned in your written testimony, when Congress passed VAWA in 

1994, it tried to make sure that victims would not bear the cost of 

the forensic exams that victims receive after an assault or rape 

kits. The problem is that some jurisdictions are still billing victims 

for the rape kits and leaving it to the victims to get reimbursed by 

insurers or victims’ funds, and without objection, Mr. Chairman, I 

would like to add to the record four articles from the National Center for Victims of Crime, U.S. News and World Report, Pro Publica, 

and Human Rights Watch that document this. 

Chairman SPECTER. Without objection, they will be made a part 

of the record. 

[The information appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator FRANKEN. But to me, the real problem is that this practice is actually legal. Under Federal law, it is legal to bill a victim 

for her rape kit, and the law just says that the State needs to fully 

reimburse her. In the past, the Office of Violence Against Women 

thought that it was a bad policy. An FAQ, Frequently Asked Questions, that your office issued in 2007 says that the Office on Violence Against Women strongly encourages States to not require victims to file a claim to their insurers. It explains that when the 

States do this, they may inadvertently inform a victim’s family of 

an assault, or spouse or children, when they get a statement from 

their insurer in the mail. 

Can you elaborate on this? Is it a good idea to allow victims to 

be billed for their rape kits even if they get fully reimbursed later? 

Ms. CARBON. In my view, I think not. I would like to share with 

you an amendment—— 

Senator FRANKEN. I am glad to hear you say that. 

Ms. CARBON. [continuing]. For the Committee’s benefit. When 

VAWA was reauthorized in 2005, in part to address that, there was 

a concern that many victims may have been raped a long time ago 

and they may not want that information shared. They may have 

elected not to prosecute for whatever reason. But in 2005, when the 

9 

Violence Against Women Act was reauthorized, the certification 

was changed to allow States to pay and use their VAWA funds or 

their STOP funds to pay for the examination. But that was conditioned on a couple of things, and one is that the victim not be required to submit it to her insurance carrier and that the examination be done by a trained professional. 

Having a victim—the loophole is there which you identify. We 

are doing training, and we have screened all of the jurisdictions to 

ensure that they are in compliance with the law; but that is not 

to say that we cannot do a better job or that perhaps the statute 

could not be strengthened to prevent any possible exposure for a 

victim. And even though the statute has improved from 2005 over 

2000, I think we are always looking for ways to do the job better, 

and if there is a way that we can protect victims better—— 

Senator FRANKEN. You said it is sort of a loophole in the law, but 

even the good part of the law is not followed. The law says that 

victims should get a free rape kit or be totally reimbursed for it. 

Ms. CARBON. Correct. 

Senator FRANKEN. But, again, I have seen reports of victims having to pay insurance deductibles for their rape exams or paying 

what is left after a Crime Victims Fund, which I think is what you 

are referring to, maxes out. 

Here is one new clip from last May which, without objection, I 

would also like to add to the record. 

Chairman SPECTER. It will be made a part of the record, without 

objection 

[The information appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator FRANKEN. The relevant part says, ‘‘The police department made one payment toward the single mother’s hospital’’—this 

was a rape victim—’’but when she submitted the $1,847 worth of 

remaining bills to the Crime Victims Fund, she received a denial 

letter telling her that law enforcement should have paid.’’ 

Director Carbon, enforcement of this law does fall under the Department of Justice’s jurisdiction. Can you assure me that you will 

make sure that rape victims are not directly or indirectly having 

to pay for their rape exams? 

Ms. CARBON. I will absolutely look into that, Senator. They 

should not have to pay for their exams—that is clear—under their 

condition of receiving their STOP money. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you so much. 

Ms. CARBON. Thank you. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Senator Franken. 

Thank you very much, Director Carbon. We now move—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Senator Specter, hello. I just came in. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Welcome, Senator Klobuchar. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SPECTER. The floor is yours. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I have been in the impeachment hearing, 

and it is kind of nice to leave the State of Louisiana for a little bit 

and come here, so thank you. All right. Thank you. 

Chairman SPECTER. You have the floor. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And I do apologize. We have this very—— 

10 

Senator FRANKEN. We all love Louisiana, though. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Well, we do, but, you know, we have been 

talking a lot about things that I did not know went on there, so 

it is good to be here. 

Ms. CARBON. It is nice to see you again. Thank you. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much. I know that you 

have focused on that there has been progress made in addressing 

this crime in metropolitan areas. I saw it myself as chief prosecutor 

in Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, 45 suburbs. 

Could you talk about what is going on in rural areas? As I began 

to get out in my State and represent the entire State, I saw this 

vast difference between the resources and the knowledge and the 

tools that rural jurisdictions have compared to metropolitan areas. 

Ms. CARBON. Certainly. Thank you. Having just returned from a 

trip to Alaska, I can talk to you about rural jurisdictions. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Senator Begich refers to his State as ‘‘extreme rural.’’ That is a different category. 

Ms. CARBON. Just for your benefit, I had never appreciated the 

extent to which it is so rural. Alaska is two and a half times the 

size of Texas, half the population of New Hampshire, about the 

population of Vermont. And so when you have most of the State 

that is not accessible and parts of the State that have no services 

at all, it truly is a desperate state of affairs. 

But in response to the more general question about rural programs, there are many programs that we fund that provide services in rural communities, and one is the Rural Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence and Stalking Assistance Program, 

so that we can provide services that are sexual assault specific 

services in those communities. 

There is also a new program, a new demonstration program 

which we are funding called the Sexual Assault Demonstration Initiative that we are about to roll out in a couple weeks that will be 

designed to provide enhanced services for dual coalitions that have 

traditionally not been providing sexual assault services but will 

provide enhanced services in rural communities. And so there will 

be five sites around the country funded for that. 

In addition, we are looking to, as Vermont has, have specialized 

sexual assault units in the local police departments, and these are 

very effective tools so that we train local agencies to be able to respond to sexual assault cases, giving them the enhanced training 

and understanding how to inquire of victims in the way that Senator Specter was speaking of earlier, the need to be sensitive to victims and not put them in a position where they are going to then 

feel as though they have assumed responsibility for the crime. 

So this kind of training that we do as well, through our Rural 

Programs, our STOP Programs, also our Campus Programs and 

many others, help to support the need for services. Our SAS program itself, Sexual Assault Services Program, is the first funding 

stream, as I mentioned earlier, that is dedicated solely to sexual 

assault victims services, and those apply in rural areas as well. It 

is extremely important that we have appropriate advocacy and 

counseling services in rural areas and that they work with local 

law enforcement and prosecution as well. 

11 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. In your testimony, your written testimony, you acknowledge that 10.5 percent of high school girls and 

4.5 percent of high school boys report some kind of rape or forced 

sexual intercourse. What is your office doing to better address the 

problems of rape at the high school level and on to college? 

Ms. CARBON. Assault of teenagers and on college campuses is one 

of the most serious problems that we have. The more that we look 

at what is going on and we study, we learn that assault is happening at earlier and earlier ages. Sixteen years ago, when the first 

Violence Against Women Act was adopted, we did not even contemplate teen violence. We talk about teen dating violence, for example, but it is really not dating violence because kids do not date. 

It is really sexual assault in those relationships. 

We have a program that OVW is funding in partnership with the 

Ad Council and the Family Violence Prevention Fund called 

ThatsNotCool.com. It is a website where teens can go online and 

they can talk peer to peer to learn about how to address what may 

be happening in their relationships so that they can be safer and 

who they can turn to to get help so that they can avoid any further 

sexual assault. 

On college campuses, we have a number of technical assistance 

providers as well, including one which we have here, the Security 

at Campus Program. We are doing lots of training on college campuses, and, in fact, the Department of Justice just completed a 

campus tour in March to highlight what is going on around college 

campuses in the country and the importance of starting new programs. 

Back in my home State of New Hampshire, we are funding a program, the Bystander Intervention Program, so that college campuses and college students can learn what they can do to intervene 

safely when they observe on college campuses an incident about to 

happen or one which may have happened. College students there 

have developed their own campaign ads to post on all of the buses 

going around campus, their own billboards saying watch out if this 

happened or do you know about this, or whatever it may be. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I do not mean to cut you off, but the cyber 

issue, have you looked into that? I have a bill with Senator 

Hutchison, and that also has House authors, and we have been 

working actually with Erin Andrews, the ESPN reporter who was 

stalked and her video was put all over the web. I suggest you guys 

look at this bill. I think it is good for going after cyber stalking. 

But have you looked at the cyber issue and how that relates to sexual assault issues in colleges and in high schools with kids? 

Ms. CARBON. It is a big part of that. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. That is what I thought. 

Ms. CARBON. The kids are using technology that in my day and 

age we never had, and it is really a very important piece of the 

overall puzzle, because, regrettably, parents are not aware of some 

of the ways in which their kids are being assaulted or stalked. And 

so having information about that is important. It is part of our 

training programs which we have. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. All right. Thank you very much. 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. 

Thank you very much, Director Carbon. 

12 

Ms. CARBON. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman SPECTER. We move now to the next panel: Carol 

Tracy, Commissioner Ramsey, Ms. Sara Reedy, Julie Weil, Ms. 

LaWanda Ravoira. 

Our first witness is Ms. Carol Tracy, the executive director of the 

Women’s Law Project in Philadelphia. She is a lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania and Bryn Mawr School of Social Research, 

a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, and a law degree 

from Temple University. 

We have a very large number of witnesses, nine in total, so we 

are going to have to observe the time limits very closely. 

Ms. Tracy, the floor is yours for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF CAROL E. TRACY, WOMEN’S LAW PROJECT, 

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 

Ms. TRACY. Thank you, Senator Specter, and thank you for responding to my request to have this hearing, and I thank other 

members of the panel for being here. 

We believe it is critically important that Congress address the 

claims that are being made that police departments throughout the 

United States are mishandling rapes and other sex crimes. We 

think it is essential that this Committee review the serious inadequacy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report both in its definition of rape and in the assessment of the 

quality of the rape data reported by local law enforcement agencies. 

The Women’s Law Project first became involved in addressing police mishandling of sex crimes in the fall of 1999 when the Philadelphia Inquirer published an investigative series which you described earlier, Senator Specter. Massive reforms have taken place 

in Philadelphia since that time, including an invitation for advocacy groups to review case files. Ten years later, we and other advocates continue to conduct an annual case review. A very strong 

collaborative reform effort put in place by then-Commissioner John 

Timoney continues under the able leadership of Commissioner 

Ramsey. We all recognize the need for constant vigilance and cooperation. We believe that we have a successful partnership in 

Philadelphia. 

Because of the role that we have played in this, journalists from 

all over the country have contacted me. My full testimony is replete 

with information. I will just highlight a couple to try to get through 

this in 5 minutes. 

The Baltimore Sun reported that, since 1992, the number of Baltimore rape cases reported to the FBI has declined by 80 percent; 

since 1991, the percentage of unfounded rape cases has tripled. 

From 2003 through 2010, police wrote reports in only 4 in 10 rape 

calls, signifying that patrol officers were rejecting cases prior to investigation. 

Each of these papers—St. Louis Post Dispatch, the Times-Picayune, the New York Times, the Village Voice—all report data like 

this. 

The translation of this data to real life presents some horrifying 

details. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that a Cleveland victim was found to be ‘‘not credible’’ after she filed a complaint that 

she had been sexually assaulted by a man who had spent 15 years 

13 

in prison for a rape charge, was a registered sex offender. Her complaint was unfounded even though she was bleeding when she 

flagged down a police cruiser and provided the police with detailed 

information about the assailant. Police eventually found the remains of 11 women at Anthony Sowell’s home, six of whom were 

murdered after police failed to pursue the complaints of these 

women. In Milwaukee and Baltimore and Philadelphia, we have all 

heard stories like that. 

Initially I thought the reports of egregious police conduct were 

isolated incidents. However, it is clear that we are seeing chronic 

and systemic patterns of police refusing to accept cases for investigation, misclassifying cases to non-criminal categories so that investigations do not occur, and ‘‘unfounding’’ complaints by determining that women are lying about being sexually assaulted. Victims are interrogated as though they are criminals, are presumptively disbelieved, are threatened with lie detector tests and/or arrest, and are blamed for the outrageous conduct of perpetrators. 

I want to move now to the Uniform Crime Report. The UCR defines, analyzes, and publicizes the incidence of sex crimes. The 

UCR is supposed to be the authoritative source of nationally represented information on crime. The data are used by policymakers, 

the media, and researchers to describe and understand crime and 

police activity. In addition, Congress allocates Federal funds to 

States and localities based on these data. 

Criminologists have informed me that this data is so inaccurate 

on rape, unlike other data that the UCR reports, that it cannot be 

used. 

Not only is the crime of rape not properly reported, but the definition is totally inadequate. ‘‘Forcible rape’’ is defined in the UCR 

as ‘‘the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will.’’ 

This definition, unchanged since 1927, is exceedingly narrow and 

does not reflect how America has significantly expanded its understanding of rape, and States have revised their laws accordingly. 

Many State criminal laws and the public at large now recognize 

that all forms of non-consensual sexual penetration, regardless of 

gender, relationship, or mode of penetration, are as serious as the 

criminal conduct included in the UCR crime. Yet the narrow definition continues. 

We wrote to the FBI in the year 2001, sadly in September 2001, 

asking them to change the definition of rape. Over 90 organizations 

signed on to our request. At that time, of course, the FBI’s attention was directed to the events of 9/11. We have never received a 

response, and we believe that both the crisis that is being reported 

in the papers and this hearing will bring about the necessary 

change. 

Rape is a heinous crime, second only to murder in severity. Sexual assault survivors who have come forward to report the crime 

are entitled to be treated fairly and with dignity. If police do not 

regard complaints of rape as crimes, then there is no investigation 

or arrest, thus further endangering the public as sexual predators 

remain free to continue to rape other victims, and in some cases 

murder them. 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Tracy, how much longer will you need? 

Ms. TRACY. Pardon? 

14 

Chairman SPECTER. How much longer will you—— 

Ms. TRACY. I am at the end. 

We recommend the following steps: Please direct the UCR program staff to update the definition of rape; charge the UCR program staff to undertake a nationwide audit of police practices to 

ensure that local law enforcement agencies are recognizing and investigating crimes; and continue the support of the Office of Violence Against Women. 

We are grateful for the opportunity to be here, and we just want 

to make a note that we should all be grateful to the press, because 

if it were not for the press reporting these, we would not be here 

today. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Tracy appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Ms. Tracy. 

We turn now to Commissioner Ramsey, Police Commissioner of 

the city of Philadelphia, fourth largest in the country, some 7,500 

employees, was for 8 years the Police Commissioner of Washington, 

D.C. 

Thank you for joining us, Commissioner Ramsey, and we look 

forward to your testimony for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES H. RAMSEY, COMMISSIONER, PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 

Commissioner RAMSEY. Thank you and good afternoon, Senator 

Specter, Senators Franken and Cardin, and invited speakers and 

guests. I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear here 

today before this Committee to talk about this critically important 

issue. 

I would like to begin by thanking a trusted colleague, tireless advocate, and friend Carol Tracy, who testified before me and summarized the incidents in Philadelphia in 1999 that led to dramatic 

changes in the department. I firmly believe that partnerships between law enforcement agencies and our social service, prevention, 

and victim advocacy counterparts are absolutely essential in addressing some of the most pressing issues that confront us. 

I will be brief in this testimony and share with you the most relevant lessons learned from our history in the Philadelphia Police 

Department on how rape has been reported and investigated. The 

deliberate downgrading of rape cases in the Philadelphia Police Department in the late 1990s, brought to light by the excellent investigative work of the Philadelphia Inquirer, exposed a widespread 

hidden practice. There was no one person or unit responsible; it 

was a pervasive and systemic failure. Consequently, it took a comprehensive and relentless approach to address this failure. Under 

then-Police Commissioner, John Timoney, many important corrective actions were taken at all levels: from training, report writing, 

and interviewing, to coding and follow-up investigation. It also required changing leadership, adjusting staffing levels, accepting 

oversight, and establishing partnerships with advocacy groups. 

The department has had the same commander of the now Special 

Victims Unit, or SVU, since the year 2000, at which time a number 

15 

of seasoned investigators were also transferred into the unit to increase our staffing levels. Our partners have also remained in their 

positions in the advocacy groups. Carol Tracy has been with the 

Women’s Law Project since these changes were implemented, and 

once a year, she and her peers from other organizations come to 

the SVU office and pore over between 300 to 400 cases selected at 

random. They have complete access to our files and our personnel. 

This is just the formal component of their annual review, but on 

a daily basis, these organizations are in constant communication 

with police personnel from SVU. They have established a long-term 

relationship, one that is built on trust and confidence in what was 

a broken system. I credit all the personnel in SVU and our advocacy groups for their persistence and their dedication to their jobs, 

and to the thousands of people they have helped deal with this 

traumatic crime. I cannot overstate the importance of this collaboration in charting a new course of direction in how rape was and 

is now reported and investigated by our department. 

The Philadelphia Police Department put measures into place 

that thus far have been helpful in re-establishing trust and promoting a culture that treats victims of rape with dignity and respect. There will always be room for improvement, but we are committed to continuous improvement as a core principle for how we 

will move forward in the future. 

Fostering collaboration amongst governmental organizations, police departments, courts, and advocacy and prevention groups is 

critical in ensuring that we work with victims of rape and sexual 

assault in a manner that is compassionate and under a process 

that is transparent. We must all be advocates for anyone who has 

been impacted by this kind of violence. If there are lessons to be 

learned from our department, I would urge others to focus on this 

aspect of how we report and investigate rape and sexual assault. 

Do not do it alone. Invite your stakeholders to be a part of this 

process and work together in treating rape and sexual assault from 

a holistic perspective. Our partnerships have strengthened every 

part of the process, from reporting each case of sexual assault, irrespective of the circumstances, to a thorough investigation by welltrained specialized detectives, and finally to working with our medical and mental health providers in minimizing the trauma experienced by victims of this heinous crime. 

A crisis is often a catalyst for real and systemic change, such as 

was the case in Philadelphia. Police departments can also learn 

from each other, and organizations like the Police Executive Research Forum can facilitate that transfer of knowledge. And I am 

pleased to announce today, as the president of PERF, that we will 

convene an executive session in early 2011 for police leaders, medical and mental health professionals, and advocacy groups to discuss the current state of sexual assault reporting and investigations. Based on the results of this session, we will make recommendations on how police agencies can partner with their social 

service and advocacy colleagues and identify best practices in the 

investigative process. 

Thank you, sir, for your time here today, and I look forward to 

answering any questions you might have. 

16 

[The prepared statement of Commissioner Ramsey appears as a 

submission for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Commissioner 

Ramsey. 

We turn now to Ms. Sara Reedy, who had an extraordinary experience, having been raped at the age of 19 by a serial offender, not 

believed by the police, jailed, later exonerated when the serial rapist was caught in other similar situations, and engaged in significant litigation which was upheld by the Court of Appeals for the 

Third Circuit. 

Ms. Reedy, thank you for joining us, and for 5 minutes we want 

to hear what happened to you. 

STATEMENT OF SARA R. REEDY, BUTLER, PENNSYLVANIA 

Ms. REEDY. Thank you, and thank you for having me here. 

On July 14, 2004, I was working a 3 to 11 shift at the Cranberry 

Gulf Station on Route 19 by myself. At about 10:40 p.m., a man 

came into the store. He proceeded to walk through the store and 

then approached the counter, where he pulled a gun out and pointed it at me. He demanded that I sit on the floor in the corner, and 

he came behind the counter where the register was located. He 

questioned me about how to open the register drawer. After removing the cash, he came and stood directly in front of me where he 

held a gun to my left temple and demanded that I give him oral 

sex, saying ‘‘if you do not swallow, then I will shoot you.’’ After the 

assault, he told me to go into the back office and rip out the phone 

lines, and then said to me to wait in the back office for 5 minutes 

after he left. 

Following the assault, I went next door to Jordan’s, an automotive shop. I had one of the employees call 911 and reported the 

crime. I stayed at the shop where several officers showed up, and 

I gave them a description of the attacker and my account of the assault. Shortly afterward, I was taken to Cranberry Passavant Hospital, where I first met Detective Evanson. 

When I arrived in the emergency room, I was put in a small office, where I begin to retell the night’s events to Detective Evanson. 

At one point he asked me how many times a day I used heroin. I 

was then soon moved to an examination room. Detective Evanson 

came inside the room several different times asking me to retell 

the attack, and soon his attitude became very aggressive toward 

me. 

He asked me countless times where I had put the money or 

where the money was. He told me if I confessed things would go 

a lot easier for me. At one point I got very upset and was crying, 

and he told me that my ‘‘tears would not save me.’’ I stayed at the 

hospital for 3 hours before I was allowed to leave to go home. 

The next day, I went to the Cranberry police station with my 

mother and stepfather to give a written statement as asked by Detective Evanson. When I arrived at the police station, I was put in 

a small conference room by myself to write my statement, and Detective Evanson took my parents into another room where he questioned them about me. After finishing my written statement, Detective Evanson came into the room and began to question and accuse 

17 

me about the theft. At one point I responded that I just wanted it 

all to go away. 

After only meeting Detective Evanson two times, I had lost hope 

of my attacker being caught because of Detective Evanson’s unwillingness to believe my story. 

Two months after I was assaulted, another woman was sexually 

assaulted within 2 miles of my attack. Detective Evanson was assigned to this case. This woman gave almost the same exact description of her attacker and his M.O. as I had. Unfortunately, Detective Evanson was unable or just refused to make the connection 

between the two assaults, because he still accused me of fabricating 

my story. 

Detective Evanson even showed up at my residence where he 

called a marked police car for backup. He stood outside my house 

asking me to change my written statement and to confess to the 

crime and they would go easy on me. After almost 45 minutes at 

my house, the only thing he managed to do was embarrass me in 

front of my neighbors and revictimize me. 

On Sunday, January 14, 2005, a warrant for my arrest was 

issued for theft, receiving stolen property, and filing a false police 

report. On Thursday, January 18th, I went to the Cranberry magistrate and turned myself in. I was given a $5,000 straight cash 

bond because, according to Detective Evanson, I was a flight risk. 

I spent the next 5 days in jail waiting for a bond reduction hearing 

and a bondsman so I could be released. This all happened while I 

was 4 months pregnant with my first child. 

While awaiting trial, I had contacted a statewide tip line for a 

serial rapist. I talked to an officer and made him aware of the fact 

that I was assaulted and that I believed it was the same man they 

were looking for. I also explained that I reported the crime and my 

complaint was not taken seriously and I was arrested for the crime. 

Over 13 months after I was assaulted, a statewide search for a 

serial rapist ended. A man by the name of Wilbur Brown was 

caught in the act of sexually assaulting a gas station attendant in 

Brookville. After being placed under arrest, Wilbur Brown confessed to 12 different sexual assaults. One of those assaults happened to me. 

Thanks to a local news reporter, I was notified of that fact. I was 

able to call my lawyer who in return called Detective Evanson who 

confirmed that there was a confession and my charges would be 

dropped. 

After this experience, it left me concerned if I would ever be able 

to rely on an officer to do his job. Because of Detective Evanson’s 

uncooperative attitude and unwillingness to believe me, the victim, 

a serial rapist was allowed to continue attacking and assaulting 

other women. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Reedy appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Ms. Reedy, for sharing that experience with us. 

Our next witness is Ms. Julie Weil, also a rape victim in Florida. 

In 2002, she was attacked by the so-called day-care rapist while 

picking her children up from a school in Miami-Dade County, beatVerDate Nov 24 2008 09:54 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 064724 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\64687.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
18 

en and later reported her crime and appeared on ‘‘America’s Most 

Wanted.’’ 

Thank you for joining us, Ms. Weil, and the floor is yours for 5 

minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JULIE WEIL, JUPITER, FLORIDA 

Ms. WEIL. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Chairman 

Specter and distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you 

for the invitation to participate in today’s hearing. I am humbled 

to share my experience with you, and I hope that it empowers all 

of you to help all rape victims get the support they need to heal 

and to fight the injustice of the crime. 

Improving the reporting and the investigation of rape will happen only when we are committed to providing victims with comprehensive support services—from that first 911 call all the way 

through to sentencing. My story demonstrates this: The support 

services I received sustained me through the longest, most grueling 

years of my life, a time when giving up seemed like the best thing 

to do. 

As mentioned, my name is Julie Weil. I was raised in Miami, 

Florida, graduated from the University of Virginia, and then spent 

a brief time here in Washington working for the Department of 

Justice. After graduate school, I got married, and my husband and 

I chose to settle down in the same small town in South Miami 

where I had grown up. And this is where my story begins. 

On a beautiful, hot October morning in 2002, my 8-month-old son 

Peter and I went to pick up my 3-year-old daughter Emily from the 

church pre-school around the corner from our house. When we got 

back to our minivan, my daughter jumped inside while I buckled 

my son into his car seat. As I was doing this, I was ambushed from 

behind and hit on the head. As my daughter screamed for her life 

and fought to escape the van, my assailant stripped the car keys 

from my hand and held a knife to my neck. He closed the door behind me, locked us in, turned up the radio, and drowned out the 

sounds of my children’s cries. As he pulled out of the church parking lot he turned to me and said, ‘‘Ma’am, do you believe in God? ’’ 

And when I said yes, he said, ‘‘Good. Then you are going to forgive 

me for what I am about to do to you and your two children.’’ 

He then drove my children and me as far away as he could to 

an area in the Everglades, parking our van on a canal bank surrounded by tall sawgrass. The hours that followed were the most 

terrifying of my life. The assailant beat me, held a knife to my 

neck, and raped me four times. Each time I was violently raped, 

he forced both of my children to watch every moment of his crime. 

My daughter was forced to sit just inches from me as I screamed 

in pain during the brutal sexual assault. When he was done with 

me, he drove me to two ATM machines and asked me to withdraw 

money. He then returned our van to the church, parked it behind 

some shrubs, and told me to wipe down all the surfaces of the car 

with my underwear to erase the fingerprints. He then laid me 

naked on the floor of the van and stuck the knife at the base of 

my neck one last time. He made my daughter beg for my life. The 

fear in my daughter Emily’s tiny voice as she pleaded for him not 

19 

to kill me still haunts me today. Then he casually opened the van 

door and walked away. 

I immediately drove to my parents’ house and limped inside. Half 

naked and bleeding, I sobbed while my parents begged me to call 

911. Although I was afraid of what my rapist might do to my family if I reported the crime, I soon called the police. The compassionate and professional responding officer and the SVU detective 

who arrived at my house that night, set the tone for how I would 

feel about my experience with law enforcement from that point on. 

Without that encouraging beginning, my story might have ended 

quite differently. 

Eventually, they took me to the rape crisis center at Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami. Thankfully, the police and the nurses at 

the rape crisis center were all veterans in dealing with the unique 

needs of rape victims. The exam was horrible and very painful. 

Being poked, prodded, and photographed was almost too much to 

take, but the forensic nurse who stuck by my side helped me 

through the pain. 

The next few months were torture on my family. The police 

found no fingerprints, and the rape treatment center uncovered no 

DNA on my body. This was extremely disheartening news. However, a few days after the rape, I received a call informing me that 

a tiny speck of DNA had been recovered on my clothing. The DNA 

matched the DNA from another crime, but, unfortunately, the information was not in the system. In a city of millions of people, my 

attacker could be anyone. I was terrified. 

The Miami-Dade police force put everything they had into looking for this man. My relationship with the detectives in this case 

served as a source of strength for me in the agonizing months after 

my rape. Because they communicated with me and checked in on 

me, I felt like they were personally invested, and this gave me the 

strength I needed to continue forward. 

By a stroke of luck and some good police work, my rapist was 

finally identified months later. He was caught beating up his pregnant girlfriend at a motel. He was printed and swabbed for DNA, 

and 3 weeks later, the DNA tests came back as a match. I now 

knew who my attacker was: Michael Thomas Seibert. I finally 

thought to myself it was over, but I did not know that the real endurance test was just beginning. 

After his arrest, the State Attorney’s office in Miami-Dade took 

over the case. I was thrown headfirst into the complex legal system 

that was totally foreign to me. The first 18 months after my rapist’s capture were filled with a great deal of confusion, delay, and 

disappointment, and I started to feel hopeless. Then my case ended 

up on the desk of Assistant State Attorney Laura Adams. Her team 

was amazing. They promptly returned my phone calls and communicated with me about everything. They empathized with my concerns and helped me to see the bigger picture, which was justice 

for my family. 

In October 2006 my trial began. It took more than 4 years of 

work to get to this point. Facing my rapist in court was extraordinarily difficult, not just for me but for my family. The compassionate care of the wonderful counselors from the State Attorney’s 

20 

office was invaluable to my family, and especially to my mother as 

she prepared to testify. 

Finally, after many days, I took the stand. For nearly 2 hours, 

just feet from my rapist, I relived the horrendous crime in graphic 

detail. I endured degrading testimony from defense attorneys and 

recited all the despicable details to a room full of strangers. 

The jury deliberated for 21⁄2 hours. I held my breath as they returned their decision: guilty on three counts of armed kidnapping, 

guilty on four counts of rape in the first degree with a deadly weapon, and guilty on one count of robbery. Sentencing came 5 weeks 

later. I told the judge how the rapist had destroyed the life I wanted for my family. I told him he forced us to leave the city, home, 

friends, and family we loved because we no longer felt safe. The 

judge saw fit to sentence Michael Seibert to an astounding seven 

consecutive life sentences plus 15 years for the crimes that occurred against my family. 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Weil, how much longer will you need? 

Ms. WEIL. I am just wrapping up. 

There is immense power in seeing a case through to the end. The 

justice system can work when victims are provided with the support we need. Without that support, my rapist may still be free and 

victimizing others. That is why organizations like RAINN must be 

provided with the funds necessary to run their website and their 

hotlines that provide emotional support for families. 

Seven years ago, I was lying on the floor of my van, in the presence of my two children, naked and bleeding. I never would have 

imagined being able to come here to Washington to speak to you 

as a survivor activist. So now I continue to share my story with law 

enforcement training, State Attorney meetings, and medical personnel. The power that a positive experience with law enforcement 

and the legal system can have on a life and on public safety is 

enormous. The safest and the healthiest communities acknowledge 

the severity of rape as a crime and begin by respecting all victims, 

providing specialized training to law enforcement and health care 

professionals, and not downplaying the prevalence or the seriousness of rape. 

Thank you so much for your time and for inviting me to speak 

on this important topic. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Weil appears as a submission for 

the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Ms. Weil. 

The final witness on this panel is Dr. LaWanda Ravoira, the 

founding director of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency, Center for Girls and Young Women, in Jacksonville, Florida. Dr. Ravoira has an extensive educational background with a 

bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorate in public administration. 

Thank you for joining us, and we look forward to your testimony 

for 5 minutes. 

21 

STATEMENT OF LAWANDA RAVOIRA, PH.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CRIME AND DELINQUENCY, CENTER 

FOR GIRLS AND YOUNG WOMEN, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 

Ms. RAVOIRA. Thank you, Chairman Specter and members of this 

Committee, for inviting the NCCD Center for Girls and Young 

Women to testify on this very important subject. 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Ravoira, before you proceed, I would like 

to recognize Senator Franken, who has another commitment at 

3:30, for a question. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, and, Dr. Ravoira, thank you for your work, and I did read 

your testimony last night. And I also want to thank Ms. Tracy and 

Commissioner Ramsey for your work, and your work, too, Ms. Weil. 

What happened to you and to Ms. Reedy is simply horrific, and I 

am just sorry about this, but I do have to go. And I just wanted 

to ask one question, and that is to Ms. Reedy. 

I would like to know what happened to Detective Evanson. I 

know that you have sued him and that was thrown out, and then 

that was overturned and that will either be going on or has gone 

on. But is he still on the force? Was he retained on the force? 

Ms. REEDY. Yes, he is still a detective. 

Senator FRANKEN. OK. That to me is pretty amazing. I want to 

thank you and Ms. Weil again for your courage being here today 

and for all the other witnesses and Ms. Weil, and you, Ms. Reedy, 

for the work that you do. 

Ms. REEDY. Thank you. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence. 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Ravoira, you may proceed. 

Ms. RAVOIRA. Thank you, Chairman. 

On behalf of the NCCD Center for Girls and Young Women, my 

work is about providing a voice for girls and young women to ensure that there are gender-appropriate responses to the treatment 

of girls and women. Today I would like to give voice to a young girl 

named Gabby. She is a 14-year-old girl, who is from Florida, who 

was not lucky enough to get a police officer who was willing to hear 

her story. 

You have heard the statistics throughout this hearing where one 

in six women will experience a rape or an attempted rape in her 

lifetime. More than half of these rape victims will be raped before 

their 18th birthday. But the statistics do not tell the whole story. 

Rape, as you have heard, is one of the most severe of all traumas. 

Think for a moment: The scene of the crime is the body of the survivor. 

One survivor’s story paints a haunting picture of the long-term 

impact of rape. Her name is Gabby. Gabby is a 14-year-old young 

woman who I have had the pleasure of knowing and learning from 

her courage. She is the daughter of a migrant family who lives in 

Florida. She was alone sleeping in her bedroom when the rapist 

came through the window, threatened her, took her out into the 

fields, and brutally raped her. She made her way back home to her 

mother, who did the right thing. She went to the local police department and asked for help. The police response was: What did 

you do to provoke this? 

22 

She was sent home without support or referrals for treatment. 

She was terrified. For months, she did not leave her house, and she 

slept with her mother. Gabby was charged then for truancy for not 

going to school. Her mother convinced her to start sleeping again 

in her bedroom, but Gabby, when everybody would go to bed at 

night, would take her pillow and sleep on the floor outside of her 

mother’s door because she was terrified. 

When she did return to her room sometime later, the rapist returned and raped her again. This time, when the mother reached 

out for help, the police did take a report, but little was done to find 

the rapist. But at least Gabby was referred to a program for girls 

and young women. Here she began to tell her story. She was terrified to leave because she did not know what the rapist looked like 

and she felt like he knew who she was and could be anywhere. 

This trauma continues to haunt her. The staff knew that she was 

the classic case of post-traumatic stress disorder. She was depressed and hopeless. She was a victim twice in what some people 

call ‘‘a secondary rape.’’ When she told the police, she was not believed. 

Gabby’s story is the story of hundreds of girls and young women 

in this country. When girls make a decision to go to the police and 

report the rape, the response of the police is critical not only to the 

girl but to her family. 

There are pervasive attitudes and beliefs by the police that inhibit their ability to stop this horrible crime. 

First, there is a belief that if it is not a stranger rape that it is 

not as serious. There is also a belief if a weapon is not involved 

that it is not as serious. This is most disturbing when what we 

know is 80 percent of sexual assaults happen by someone who 

knows the victim. It is also quite disturbing when we know that 

control tactics do not always involve a weapon. That was certainly 

the case of Gabby. She was simply threatened and terrified. 

Also, what we see is law enforcement will discourage victims 

from reporting, sometimes portraying the personal cost to pursue 

prosecution, like repeated court trips, cross-examinations that can 

be humiliating, or simply they do not believe the victim. 

Police may also threaten the victim about being charged for the 

crime if there is inconsistency in their story, and certainly the advocates that I work with feel the most egregious thing that continues to happen is that victims are asked to sign a waiver of prosecution when there is an acquaintance rape, which means the rape 

does not even get reviewed by the State Attorney. We hear consistently that it is just too hard to prosecute. What we believe is that 

the police officers are not trained to conduct an appropriate investigation. 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Ravoira, how long will you—— 

Ms. RAVOIRA. I just have a few recommendations. 

The Center for Girls and Young Women is calling for an examination of the police culture and practices to improve the response 

to girls and young women. First, we believe, in addition to the 

things that you have already heard, that there should be consequences for police officers who unfairly detain and who treat victims of sexual violence as criminals. We also believe that there 

23 

should be funding for more research for services for the missing 

voices and experiences of the highly marginalized—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Ravoira—— 

Ms. RAVOIRA [continuing]. And vulnerable population. 

Chairman SPECTER [continuing]. How long will you need? How 

much longer will you need? 

Ms. RAVOIRA. About 10 seconds. Thank you. 

And these victims include immigrants, individuals from rural 

communities, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender victims, survivors with disabilities, as well as homeless women, and girls and 

women who are living in institutions and prisons. There also needs 

to be special attention to the rape and sexual assault of women in 

the military. 

We believe that it is vital that we collect accurate information 

about sexual assaults and the impact of police practices. It is our 

belief that no one should have to go through what Gabby went 

through and what she endured and continues to deal with. She deserves better, and so do all of the other women. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ravoira appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Reedy, how have you fared since this 

terrible experience? 

Ms. REEDY. I am sorry. Could you repeat that? I am sorry. Could 

you repeat that? I did not—— 

Chairman SPECTER. How have you been after being the victim of 

the terrible circumstances you describe? How are you now? 

Ms. REEDY. Things are getting better. It has been a long road. 

I have been lucky to have a great family to support me and help 

me. 

Chairman SPECTER. How can you account for that police officer 

still being on the force? 

Ms. REEDY. I find it insulting, not only to me but to the people 

in the community. 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Weil, how are your children? 

Ms. WEIL. Thank you for asking. My son was only 8 months old. 

He was too small to really understand what was happening. With 

him, it was more the 4 years that passed I was very distracted and 

not able to really be the Mom to him I wanted to be. My daughter 

struggles a lot still to this day with an eating disorder and an anxiety disorder, because although the incident happened on a single 

day, she was questioned repeatedly by police and by the State Attorney’s office, so she was forced to relive it for a long time. 

Chairman SPECTER. How are they now? 

Ms. WEIL. To see them, on the surface we are all doing a lot better. We have moved to a new community, and we are all getting 

counseling, and the future looks brighter than it did for sure 7 

years ago. 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Ravoira, how is Gabby? 

Ms. RAVOIRA. Gabby is doing much better. She is going to school, 

and she is moving forward with her life. But the scars are really 

deep. 

Chairman SPECTER. Did they ever catch the fellow? 

Ms. RAVOIRA. They did not. 

24 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Tracy, you tell about the FBI not responding. You have pinpointed a very serious problem about the 

definition, which is antiquated. I am sorry the FBI has not responded to your letter. I will let you know when they respond to 

mine. The Subcommittee will take this up with the FBI. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. TRACY. Thank you. 

Chairman SPECTER. We will keep you posted. 

Commissioner Ramsey, your practices of involving the stakeholders, as you have put it, is a very good idea. Nothing like having 

oversight by the victims’ advocates. Tell us a little more about exactly how that works. You make those records available to the 

women’s group, and they review them and give you their judgment 

as to whether something else should be done? 

Commissioner RAMSEY. Yes, sir. Let me again say that John 

Timoney deserves the credit for having begun this, but I agree 

wholeheartedly with this approach and will continue to refine it 

and make it even better. 

But, yes, at least once a year, 300, 400 cases are chosen at random, and they spend a few days actually going over these cases, 

and particularly unfounded or exceptionally cleared cases, and they 

will find some cases where it is felt that there are some investigative leads that were not followed up on and so forth. We get it back 

and go out and complete the investigation. 

There are sometimes active cases that are ongoing where either 

we need their assistance or they have some questions for us. And, 

again, I think it is a good check and balance, and I think that it 

is the way to go. I think that no matter how good your system may 

be internally, if you do not have someone from the outside that can 

review and critique what it is you are doing and always working 

toward helping to make it better, then I think that it is always 

going to be subject to some, you know, doubt as to whether or not 

you are thoroughly investigating these crimes. 

Our job is to take the report. It does not matter what you may 

feel about the victim. Take the report. Let the investigation reveal 

whether or not it is founded, unfounded, what needs to happen. Let 

the investigative process take hold. 

Chairman SPECTER. Commissioner, I have only got 47 seconds 

left. 

Ms. Tracy, as a Pennsylvanian, you are one of my employers, and 

as a Philadelphian, you are one of Commissioner Ramsey’s employers. Is he doing a good job on this subject? 

Ms. TRACY. Absolutely, both on this subject and we are also 

working very intensively with them on domestic violence and stalking, and we are, in fact, putting a whole new protocol in place for 

dealing with domestic violence. We have a really good partnership, 

and we can take complaints to them, and the defensiveness is not 

there. Just we have got a problem, we are going to talk about it, 

and we move forward. But they have been incredibly responsive to 

the advocacy community. 

Chairman SPECTER. Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me thank 

this panel. 

25 

We hear the statistics, we hear the numbers, and I really want 

to thank particularly Ms. Reedy and Ms. Weil for being here to put 

a face on the issue. Numbers can be cold, but when you hear the 

testimony of people who have been victimized, you realize how 

many families have been involved and affected by the policies, the 

laws we pass, and the way that they are implemented. So I really 

want to thank you. I know it is not easy to appear before us, and 

I thank both of you for being here to help us understand a little 

bit better the seriousness of what we are dealing with. 

Ms. Tracy, and also Mr. Ramsey, you talk about the statistical 

information. Unless we have good statistics, we cannot plan how to 

deal with this. You cannot allocate the resources. You do not know 

how many—how the police have to allocate their resources, local 

governments, the State’s Attorney, and, of course, here at the national level. And we do not have good statistical information on 

sexual assaults. We just do not have it. We need to get beyond just 

the current way that it is reported. 

I know that you mentioned the Uniform Crime Report. I think 

we need to get to a National Incident Based Reporting System 

which gives a lot more information and detail so that we can develop a uniform understanding of what is happening around the 

Nation. I know in my own State of Maryland, we are moving forward to implement the National Incident Based Reporting System. 

It is more costly, and we are going to need to see whether we need 

to do policies nationally to make sure we have this accurately done 

for sexual assault cases. 

But then you need to have a way in which you have some uniform and accountable system for evaluating and referring the incidents that occur. It cannot rest with the responding police officer. 

I am sure they are doing incredible work, but you need to have 

independent, accountable reviews of what is happening for the 

proper referral and for providing the proper assistance to the victim. You could not have two dramatically different stories than the 

two people who are before us, both suffering from a horrible incident, one finding the system that responded-–4 years is too long, 

but that is our justice system, and sometimes it takes a long time 

to get where we need to. In your case, the results were what it 

should have been. Obviously, we did not want this to happen at all. 

We want to prevent it. But in Ms. Reedy’s case, it was horrible. 

You were abused twice, and that should never have happened. 

So I think the lesson learned from this panel, Mr. Chairman, is 

that we really need to get better statistical information as to what 

is happening, and we need to make sure that there is a consistent 

policy in the way that reports are handled and that there is an accountable system for reviewing the way that they are referred for 

investigation and prosecution so that we can properly evaluate 

what we need to do to be a partner here at the Federal level to 

make sure this is handled properly. 

Just speaking, Ms. Tracy, to your point about the Philadelphia 

Inquirer and what happened in the Baltimore Sun papers, when 

you put a spotlight on it, people respond. Unfortunately, there are 

so many things that people are doing that this has become not a 

priority in too many jurisdictions around the Nation. We want to 

26 

make sure this is a priority in every jurisdiction around the country. 

Ms. TRACY. And it should not just be the responsibility of investigative reporters to look at this, because in addition to the UCR 

not having the appropriate definition, they are not exercising their 

audit responsibility. When 45 cities with populations over 100,000 

have unfounded rates of rape over 20 percent, there is something 

very wrong with those cities. Some cities have more unfoundeds 

than they have reported rapes. 

So the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report really needs to examine both 

its definition and its audit responsibilities, and I think we would 

all be happy if NIBRS were implemented throughout the country. 

Part of the reason that we wrote the letter we did in 2001 is that 

we just saw it was not moving as quickly or at all. 

Senator CARDIN. I agree completely. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Senator Cardin. 

We now turn to our next panel: Dr. Kilpatrick, Scott Berkowitz, 

Eleanor Smeal, and Professor Dempsey. 

Our first witness on this panel is Dr. Dean Kilpatrick, Professor 

of Clinical Psychology at the Medical University of South Carolina, 

director of the National Crime Victims Center. While they are departing, I want to thank very much our first panel: Ms. Tracy, Mr. 

Ramsey, Ms. Reedy, Ms. Weil, and Dr. Ravoira. 

We begin with you, Dr. Kilpatrick. Regrettably, the number of 

witnesses we have had and the number of questions have prevented our moving into as much detail analytically as I would have 

liked, and as we have done at most hearings. But there are other 

commitments shortly after 4, which has required us to keep on a 

very tight schedule. 

We look forward to your testimony, Dr. Kilpatrick. The floor is 

yours for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF DEAN G. KILPATRICK, PH.D., DISTINGUISHED 

UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR, VICE CHAIR FOR EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CRIME 

VICTIMS RESEARCH & TREATMENT CENTER, MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA 

Mr. KILPATRICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the Commerce 

Department, and I appreciate the opportunity for being able to address the Committee. I have submitted a lot of written material 

which would tell you more than anyone ever wanted to know about 

rape statistics, and so I am not going to go into that in any depth 

at all. 

What I would like to say is that I think statistics are important 

because it provides policymakers with information that will allow 

us to know whether things are changing, whether they are getting 

better or worse, and where the problems lie so that we can document really what needs to be done. 

I have been in this field for a long time, since 1974, when I 

helped establish the first rape crisis center in the State of South 

Carolina. And I would like to say that I think things have gotten 

27 

better in some ways, and in some ways things have not changed 

at all. 

One of the things that has not changed significantly is improvements in the way that particularly the FBI Uniform Crime Report 

documents and commands to law enforcement agencies about how 

the data are collected. And so I would just like to associate myself 

with the remarks of several other people who say that there is really no excuse now not to change the way that the FBI Uniform 

Crime Report addresses the issue of rape. 

I would also like to talk about two studies briefly that my colleagues and I have done that had the advantage of occurring over 

15 years apart, and so they do provide some information using contemporary, state-of-the-art measurement in terms of a victimization survey of actually what has happened to the prevalence of 

rape, meaning the proportion of women who have ever been raped, 

as well as more recent cases. 

To make a long story very short, what we have found is basically 

that over that 15-year period there has been no improvement at all 

in terms of the proportion of adult women in the United States who 

have been victims of forcible rape. In fact, it has gone up over 25 

percent. So, in fact, the burden of rape on women in America is actually greater now than it was 15 years ago. 

Second, we have not found any increase, substantial increase in 

terms of the proportion of rape cases that are reported to law enforcement. Everything you have heard about today has been cases 

that law enforcement knew about and then mishandled in many 

cases. But most of the cases—in fact, over 80 percent of the cases 

still go unreported. And so basically no law enforcement agency, no 

criminal justice system can address the issues of those victims if 

women are reluctant to come forward. 

Third, my testimony, my written testimony, outlines concerns 

that rape victims had. The big one is being believed by other people, people finding out about my name, and over 60 percent of the 

victims are still saying that they are very concerned about being 

believed and about what happens to victims after they report. The 

concerns of the women in America who have been raped are the 

same now as they were 15 years ago, so there has been absolutely 

no progress on that. 

Finally, we found that being the victim of rape increased substantially the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression, suicide attempts, and alcohol and drug abuse problems. And 

so most of the people who had those problems still have them, suggesting that most victims are not getting effective mental health 

care. 

So, in conclusion, let me just say that I really do think that the 

time has come for the Senate to demand that the Justice Department change not only the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting system for 

rape, but that it also engages in an updating of the National Crime 

Victimization Survey, which woefully under-measures rape. And so 

without better data on that, we will not have information about 

whether things are getting better or not without the type of independent studies that I told you about today. 

Thank you and I would be happy to answer questions. 

28 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kilpatrick appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Dr. Kilpatrick. 

We now turn to Mr. Scott Berkowitz, founder and president of 

the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, an organization 

with affiliates in all 50 States. It has a hotline that receives approximately 9,500 calls per month and reportedly has helped over 

1 million individuals since the founding of the organization in 1994. 

The floor is yours for 5 minutes, Mr. Berkowitz. 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT BERKOWITZ, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, RAPE, ABUSE, AND INCEST NATIONAL NETWORK 

(RAINN), WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. BERKOWITZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for holding 

this hearing and including me. 

In the U.S. today, rape is a crime without consequence—except 

for the victim. The Justice Department’s most recent estimate is 

that about 60 percent of victims never report their rape to the police. 

Here we go. 

Chairman SPECTER. You are on. 

Mr. BERKOWITZ. Sorry. And since many reports do not lead to an 

arrest and many arrests do not lead to a conviction or prison time, 

the bottom line is that only about one out of every 16 rapists will 

ever spend even a single day in prison. Just one. As long as rapists 

have about a 94-percent chance of escaping punishment, they are 

not likely to be deterred. 

So putting more rapists in jail is the single most effective rape 

prevention tool that has ever existed. To accomplish that is going 

to require a sustained and focused effort to increase both reporting 

and conviction rates. 

A generation ago, the reasons that victims most often gave for 

not reporting I think spoke vividly of the way society viewed the 

crime. They feared not being believed. They feared being interrogated about—and blamed for—their own behavior, from what they 

were wearing to why they gave the perpetrator the opportunity to 

commit the crime. In short, they feared that they would be the one 

on trial. 

Today, the perception of many victims has evolved along with 

greater public understanding of the crime, and the reasons that we 

hear commonly now are along the lines of: they do not want their 

loved ones to know what happened. They are ashamed about what 

happened or blame themselves. Or they just want to put the whole 

thing behind them. 

Fear, or at least skepticism, of how they might be treated by police does still exist, but it has moved down the list of reasons for 

not reporting. And so while we need more training for law enforcement on treating victims appropriately, we also need efforts that 

speak to—and educate—victims about the importance of reporting. 

Research also indicates that victims of sexual violence who receive counseling are significantly more likely to report the crime to 

police. 

I want to talk briefly about law enforcement and prosecution. 

And the good news is: I think many police agencies have improved 

29 

their handling of sex crimes in recent years. But there are still 

many problems in addition to the UCR and coding problems that 

others have discussed today. 

One problem is that many agencies deal with so few sexual assault cases each year, which makes it difficult to establish the specialized skills to investigate rape cases. One of the most important 

things Congress can do is to help local law enforcement tap into 

the expertise they need to successfully investigate and prosecute 

these cases. 

Skilled investigators operate to a great extent on instinct and 

perception, which most of the time is a good thing. But it can cause 

problems when it is based on misinformation or false impressions. 

Impressions like: a large percentage of rape reports are false, when 

the FBI tells us that is just not true. 

Or—and this is a big one that we still hear a lot—DNA does not 

matter unless the attacker was a stranger or unless we have a suspect identified. In fact, as the best DAs will tell you, having DNA 

evidence in hand is crucial for any prosecution these days. Juries 

expect it. It corroborates the victim’s story. And, increasingly, it 

helps identify patterns of serial rapists, even acquaintance rapists. 

However, the data we have is insufficient for our needs and impedes our ability to understand the barriers to reporting, and why 

so few rapists end up in prison. For example, we would like to see 

DOJ and the States better track rape cases, from initial report all 

the way through ultimate disposition. 

Based on what we do know, there are few things that Congress 

can do right now. 

First, they can pass the SAFER Act, just introduced in the 

House, which would create a national registry of forensic evidence 

from sexual assault cases. The SAFER Act would provide crucial 

information to policymakers and rape victims, and for the first time 

open up data to the media so that we could have investigative reports like those that have helped us see what is going on in Baltimore and elsewhere. SAFER would also allow us to track the status of evidence testing by jurisdiction. It would help us eliminate 

the DNA testing backlog once and for all. 

In the upcoming reauthorization of the Justice For All Act, Congress should increase the percentage of Debbie Smith Act funds 

that are spent directly on DNA testing and analysis, incorporate 

the registry requirements of the SAFER Act, and set best practices 

standards for the prompt testing of all sexual assault crime scene 

evidence. 

We also need Congress’ support to gather real, solid, in-depth 

data about the problems I have discussed today. And then we need 

your support to help fix them. 

Overall, as Congress moves forward with the Violence Against 

Women Act and other crime legislation over the next year, we 

would like to see the overarching question be: What will this bill 

do to improve the reporting and conviction rates of rape cases? At 

the moment, 94 percent of rapists are escaping any form of punishment. So this should be the main focus of policymakers. 

Because today, violent criminals will sexually assault another 

657 Americans. And if history is any guide, 616 of those criminals 

30 

will wake up tomorrow morning—and every morning thereafter— 

free to start all over again. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Berkowitz appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you, Mr. Berkowitz. 

We turn now to Ms. Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist 

Majority Foundation, former president of the National Organization for Women. 

The floor is yours for 5 minutes, Ms. Smeal. 

STATEMENT OF ELEANOR CUTRI SMEAL, FEMINIST MAJORITY 

FOUNDATION, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 

Ms. SMEAL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for holding this hearing that affects the health and safety of millions of women and girls in the United States. 

I am president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, which one 

of its major goals is to reduce violence against women. In 1995, the 

center established the National Center for—the foundation established the National Center for Women and Policing, which is a division of the Foundation. The center promotes increasing the numbers of women at all ranks of law enforcement, both to promote 

equality for women and to improve police response to violence 

against women. 

I am going to summarize my testimony, and I would like to submit the whole testimony in the record. 

Chairman SPECTER. Without objection, it will be made a part of 

the record. 

Ms. SMEAL. Thank you very much. 

I am going to skip over the prevalence of rape since so much has 

been said about it, but I want to underscore what was just said by 

Mr. Berkowitz about the fact that so few are incarcerated—rapists. 

In fact, according to one study, it is less than 1 percent. So let us 

just keep that in mind. 

Not only that, but the undetected rapists tend to be serial rapists. Two shocking studies revealed that essentially for rapes being 

committed, the undetected rapists were serial rapists. Most rapists 

are serial rapists, and they were committing the bulk of the rapes, 

between 91 and 95 percent. This is why rape kits are so important, 

and it is so important that they are processed. And I know this is 

not the feature of this hearing, but it shows—it is just one indicator of the need to further investigate rape, because if you process 

the kits, and because of the nature of serial rape, you would be 

finding people who are now going undetected and who will rape 

again. 

Another major point is that 75 percent of rapes are done by people—probably about 75 percent—that are acquaintance rapes. But 

that is not to be minimized because, again, there are patterns and 

these are women who have been singled out, they will single out 

other women. 

Research shows that the vast majority of rapes today involve 

both subduing the victim by alcohol or drugs. Now, the reason I am 

pointing out all these things is that it will tie into our recommendations of what should be done with the Uniform Crime ReVerDate Nov 24 2008 09:54 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 064724 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\64687.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
31 

port. I want to, though, specialize in talking about the need to recruit more women in policing. 

Studies show that, in fact, there is a culture in the police departments that must be changed toward women. And I have worked on 

this problem for nearly four decades, and we have just not made 

much progress. Women are still only, according to the latest reports, about 12 percent of police departments overall and 15 percent of the largest police departments. 

I am now going to skip, because time is running out, to our recommendations. The Uniform Crime Report should include things it 

currently does not on rape. In fact, it is carnal knowledge, so it is 

omitting oral rape, anal rape. It is omitting rapes facilitated by 

drugs and alcohol. It is omitting when the victim is unconscious. 

And, I mean, it is almost ridiculous what it is omitting. It does not 

include men. It does not include homosexual rapes. 

Now, let us go on to the victimization study. It does not include 

children under the age of 12, and that is a large category of rapes, 

about 25 percent. Federal guidelines also should be issued on how 

you determine unfounded cases. It is very definite what is an unfounded case, but we know that police are essentially calling something as unfounded, which then, if the person is found to be a serial rapist, it is harder to prosecute them for the ones that are unfounded because it is believed that it was baseless or that the victim was lying. And so this actually compounds the problem. 

I believe and we believe that one of the most important things 

is Federal guidelines and Federal programs should encourage the 

recruitment of women police officers, and there are many ways of 

doing it, and also encourage the recruitment of police officers with 

specialized training in nursing, social work, and in dealing with 

sexual assault. 

And, of course, we think that the Violence Against Women Office 

should be—the funding should be increased, especially in the 

last—— 

Chairman SPECTER. How much more time will you need? 

Ms. SMEAL. I am ending right now. Especially in the last 8 years, 

funding has been decreased. 

So we know many changes should occur, but we have got to start 

with changing the definition of rape, which is contributing to an 

under-allocation of resources. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Smeal appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Kilpatrick, you mentioned the issue of 

suicide, the only person to do so. Can you amplify your concerns 

there? To what extent is that a problem with rape victims? 

Mr. KILPATRICK. Well, women who have been a victim of rape are 

about 10 times more likely—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Dr. Kilpatrick, I have to turn to Professor 

Dempsey. I was so busy reading her background, I left her out. A 

very distinguished background. 

Ms. DEMPSEY. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman SPECTER. Associate professor at Villanova, University 

Lecturer in Law and Tutorial Fellow at Oxford University, tutor at 

the University College in London, and teaches courses involving 

32 

feminist legal theory. We will come to that, but first your testimony, Professor Dempsey, for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MICHELLE MADDEN DEMPSEY, ASSOCIATE 

PROFESSOR OF LAW, VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF 

LAW, VILLANOVA, PENNSYLVANIA 

Ms. DEMPSEY. Thank you, Senator Specter, and thank you for 

convening this hearing. Going last after so many distinguished and 

experienced witnesses leads me to a position where first I want to 

say I agree, and I am going to try to say something that perhaps 

we have not touched on quite as much. 

Before addressing specific issues, however, I wish to place our 

discussion into the larger context of the criminal justice system as 

a whole. The failure to report and investigate rape cannot properly 

be understood in isolation from issues of failure of prosecutors to 

charge rape cases and to take them to trial, failures of juries to 

convict, and the failure of judges to impose adequate sentences 

upon conviction. Each step in the criminal justice system is directly 

related to the next: Survivors will fail to report if they believe their 

cases will not be taken seriously by police; police will fail to properly investigate if they believe prosecutors will not aggressively 

pursue charges in court; prosecutors will not aggressively pursue 

charges if they believe juries are unlikely to convict. Moreover, the 

entire system—and, indeed, the entire culture in which the system 

operates—will take rape less seriously when the sentences passed 

by judges do not reflect the true gravity of the offense. 

So all of this is to say that the topic of conversation here, the 

chronic failure to report and investigate rape, takes place within a 

broader culture and a systemic failure not only of the criminal justice system but of our culture as a whole surrounding rape. 

I will not touch on the issue of victims failing to report rape because I believe that has adequately been covered. I would, however, 

like to discuss the issue of investigation. I think as Judge Carbon 

rightly noted, the model that is going on in Philadelphia right now 

is a wonderful model, not only because it increases accountability 

and it obviously assists victims to obtain justice, but because it respects the rule of law. This is a matter of the principle of legality, 

that the State should be accountable to the people. And I think 

what is going on in Philadelphia is not only outstanding in Philadelphia—and I am proud to be a Pennsylvanian and delighted that 

that is happening—but it is a model for the rest of the country. I 

really think that needs to be exported as aggressively as possible. 

With respect to the issue of police misclassifying rape and other 

sex crimes as non-crimes, I would like to differentiate two issues 

we have discussed here today. One is the question of the UCR definition of rape, which, as I think we can all agree, is ridiculous. It 

is archaic, it is old-fashioned, it is insulting. And it does not capture the broad majority of rapes. So that is one issue. Obviously, 

we are all in agreement and singing from the same hymn sheet 

that the UCR definition of rape needs to be changed. 

In addition to that, as I commented in my written testimony— 

and I would hope that could be offered into evidence as well—there 

are real problems with the handbook of the UCR. The only illustrations of rape provided are stranger rape and gang rape. There are 

33 

no illustrations provided to police to reflect the reality of acquaintance rape or intimate partner violence. And that suggests that not 

only the definition needs to be changed but that the handbook 

needs to be rewritten for this century. So that is one issue, the definition and the illustrations in the handbook. 

There is another issue with respect to coding, and this comes to 

the fourth issue we have been asked to consider, which is the problem of police unfounding rape cases. Now, this is the problem of 

coding with the UCR, and quite simply, the UCR program actually 

encourages police officers to unfound cases. It does this by limiting 

the range of categories available to police officers in recording case 

dispositions. There are only three options available to recording a 

case disposition under the UCR program: one is unfounded, which 

is to say by definition no crime has occurred; the other is cleared 

by arrest, which, again, by definition is to say that an arrest has 

been made and the case has been forwarded for prosecution; and 

the third option is cleared by exceptional means, which is by definition circumstances which preclude prosecution, for example, the 

death of the defendant or an inability to extradite the defendant 

from a foreign jurisdiction. 

There are two major problems with the coding under the UCR 

that I would like to call to our attention, and I would ask that perhaps this be added to your letter to the FBI so that they can take 

this into consideration as well, and that is, one, with respect to the 

issue of clearing a case by exceptional means, we cannot include 

the fact that the victim has withdrawn her cooperation from the 

case as a reason to clear a case by exceptional means. Victim noncooperation in prosecutions does not legally preclude the State from 

going forward. The State prosecutes crime, not the victims. The 

UCR sends exactly the opposite message to local law enforcement 

by allowing that to be one of the ways in which a case can be 

cleared. 

Secondly, I think it is worth considering the possibility of adding 

a third way of disposing of a case, adding a case disposition which 

reflects that the case is founded but was rejected for prosecution 

based on inadequate evidence. 

Now, I think that is something that is worth further debate, but 

I think that the problem with unfounding cases is not only a problem of police misconduct but is also a problem of the structure of 

the UCR program in the way that it encourages officers to unfound 

cases in order to clear them. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dempsey appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you, Professor Dempsey. 

Dr. Kilpatrick, I was on the question of suicide, and the question 

to you is: To what extent is that a problem for rape victims? 

Mr. KILPATRICK. Well, it is difficult to look at completed suicides 

in the type of research that we do because we are talking to people, 

you know, who are still alive. But if you look at attempted suicide, 

you know, in both of the studies that we have done with national 

probability—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Well, how about a correlation between people who commit suicide and those who have been rape victims? 

34 

Mr. KILPATRICK. Well, unfortunately, most rape goes undetected 

for the reasons that we have talked about today so that we do not 

know about a lot of women—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Well, how about the rapes which are detected? Is there any sequence, if not a causal connection? 

Mr. KILPATRICK. Well, people who have post-traumatic stress disorder, as the military is finding out, are more likely to make suicide attempts. Rape victims are much more likely to make suicide 

attempts than comparable women who have not been raped. And 

so it is a huge risk factor. My professional opinion as a clinical psychologist is that there is some correlation there, and that—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Ms. Smeal, you talk about changing the culture. How do you do that, the culture of police departments? 

Ms. SMEAL. One, I think that you change the educational requirements, and I do think that people who are trained in sexual 

assault, who are social workers, nurses, people who—— 

Chairman SPECTER. How do you do that with police budgets? 

Ms. SMEAL. Well, unfortunately, social workers do not get paid 

that much, do they? So I do not think it would hurt the—— 

Chairman SPECTER. You are talking about education. 

Ms. SMEAL. Oh, well, what I mean is that, as I said, a graduate 

of a social work class does not get paid that much. But I also think 

increasing the percentage of women—— 

Chairman SPECTER. How do you influence—— 

Ms. SMEAL.—is imperative. 

Chairman SPECTER.—police culture along the line you suggest? 

You talk about social workers, and is that realistic, given police department budgets? 

Ms. SMEAL. Yes, I do. I think it is very realistic, because I do not 

think the average social worker in the United States even makes 

as much as the average police officer today. And I also think that 

we have to do something about recruiting more women into policing. We in the women’s rights movement have been suing, as have 

individual women, with the pervasive patterns of sex discrimination in policing for 40 years, and we are still only—what is it?— 

12 percent of police officers of the United States. 

Chairman SPECTER. A couple more questions. Mr. Berkowitz— 

sorry to move on, but—— 

Ms. SMEAL. Sure, I understand. 

Chairman SPECTER.—time is very limited. 

What would your recommendation be about trying to get more 

sensitivity with the interviewers, the police officers? How do we do 

that in a practical sense given the limitations of police budgets and 

it is so difficult to recruit people who have a vast educational background in this kind of matter? 

Mr. BERKOWITZ. I think the training already exists. I think that 

a lot of police departments have made tremendous progress on that 

and have implemented good training and improved the way they 

handle this. There is a lot of existing training that the International Association of Chiefs of Police and others offer. 

Chairman SPECTER. Professor Dempsey, I note among your 

courses, you teach feminist legal theory. What is feminist legal theory? 

35 

Ms. DEMPSEY. You should come to my class. We would be honored to have you. It is one of the main issues we discuss. The way 

that we—— 

Chairman SPECTER. Do you meet on weekends? 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. DEMPSEY. We would have a special session if you wanted to 

attend. It is a question of basically evaluating existing law, legal 

doctrine, not only the positive law on the books, as we say, but also 

law in the broader sense, the things that we should see to when 

organizing our world, whether it has been made part of positive 

law or not. So we both evaluate existing laws, and consider normative arguments for improving those laws from a feminist point 

of view. 

Chairman SPECTER. What would your advice be to women’s organizations to persuade police commissioners, other than Commissioner Ramsey, to allow for transparency and allow for stakeholders to be involved in reviewing these cases? 

Ms. DEMPSEY. I think there needs to be a context in which these 

people can sit down together. I think that literally just being in the 

same room and talking face to face begins to break down some of 

the myths that each side holds against the other. 

I am an unusual bird because I am both a feminist activist and 

a former prosecutor, and I married a police officer. So I know you 

can bring these groups together, and they can—in my own experience as a prosecutor, we were very successful in getting the police 

on board with more aggressive domestic violence and sexual assault charging and prosecution simply because we took the time to 

meet together and sat down and talked about our concerns and 

educated the advocates regarding the law and educated the lawyers 

and the police officers regarding the advocates’ concerns. 

Chairman SPECTER. Thank you very much, Dr. Kilpatrick, Mr. 

Berkowitz, Ms. Smeal, Professor Dempsey. 

This is a subject of enormous importance, and I regret that we 

have not had more time today to do it justice. We have not begun 

to scratch the surface. We had very distinguished panels. It is insufficient to say you have 5 minutes, insufficient totally. Senators 

interrupt because we only have a few minutes to question you, but 

that happens to Supreme Court nominees as well as you folks here 

today. It happens to everybody. 

It is my hope that we will stimulate some interest by police departments in this subject. There are a couple of things we can do. 

I think we can get the FBI to change its definition. We can get the 

FBI to change its survey. We have oversight on the FBI from this 

Committee, and I think the Director will respond. 

There is a lot more to rape than is in that FBI definition. It totally eliminates the issue of what is going on in jails today across 

the country on same-sex rape. And the issue of training, it would 

be good to get some Federal funding incentives to police departments. I commend what you have done, Commissioner Ramsey, 

and I would like to see more police departments do what you do, 

and I would like to see more women’s organizations knocking on 

the doors—knock on their doors. Knock on their doors. And if they 

do not respond, knock on the mayor’s door. And you do not have 

to knock on my door. You can just tap on it. 

36 

Thank you all very much. 

[Whereupon, at 4:17 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Questions and answers and submissions for the the record follow.] 

37 


64687.001
38 


64687.002
39 


64687.003
40 


64687.004
41 


64687.005
42 


64687.006
43 


64687.007
44 


64687.008
45 


64687.009
46 


64687.010
47 


64687.011
48 


64687.012
49 


64687.013
50 


64687.014
51 


64687.015
52 


64687.016
53 


64687.017
54 


64687.018
55 


64687.019
56 


64687.020
57 


64687.021
58 


64687.022
59 


64687.023
60 


64687.024
61 


64687.025
62 


64687.026
63 


64687.027
64 


64687.028
65 


64687.029
66 


64687.030
67 


64687.031
68 


64687.032
69 


64687.033
70 


64687.034
71 


64687.035
72 


64687.036
73 


64687.037
74 


64687.038
75 


64687.039
76 


64687.040
77 


64687.041
78 


64687.042
79 


64687.043
80 


64687.044
81 


64687.045
82 


64687.046
83 


64687.047
84 


64687.048
85 


64687.049
86 


64687.050
87 


64687.051
88 


64687.052
89 


64687.053
90 


64687.054
91 


64687.055
92 


64687.056
93 


64687.057
94 


64687.058
95 


64687.059
96 


64687.060
97 


64687.061
98 


64687.062
99 


64687.063
100 


64687.064
101 


64687.065
102 


64687.066
103 


64687.067
104 


64687.068
105 


64687.069
106 


64687.070
107 


64687.071
108 


64687.072
109 


64687.073
110 


64687.074
111 


64687.075
112 


64687.076
113 


64687.077
114 


64687.078
115 


64687.079
116 


64687.080
117 


64687.081
118 


64687.082
119 


64687.083
120 


64687.084
121 


64687.085
122 


64687.086
123 


64687.087
124 


64687.088
125 


64687.089
126 


64687.090
127 


64687.091
128 


64687.092
129 


64687.093
130 


64687.094
131 


64687.095
132 


64687.096
133 


64687.097
134 


64687.098
135 


64687.099
136 


64687.155
137 


64687.156
138 


64687.157
139 


64687.158
140 


64687.159
141 


64687.160
142 


64687.161
143 


64687.162
144 


64687.163
145 


64687.164
146 


64687.165
147 


64687.166
148 


64687.167
149 


64687.168
150 


64687.169
151 


64687.170
152 


64687.171
153 


64687.172
154 


64687.173
155 


64687.174
156 


64687.175
157 


64687.176
158 


64687.177
159 


64687.178
160 


64687.179
161 


64687.180
162 


64687.181
163 


64687.182
164 


64687.183
165 


64687.184
166 


64687.185
167 


64687.186
168 


64687.187
169 


64687.188
170 


64687.189
171 


64687.190
172 


64687.191
173 


64687.192
174 


64687.193
175 


64687.194
176 


64687.195
177 


64687.196
178 


64687.197
179 


64687.198
180 


64687.199
181 


64687.200
182 


64687.201
183 


64687.202
184 


64687.203
185 


64687.204
186 


64687.205
187 


64687.206
188 


64687.207
189 


64687.208
190 


64687.209
191 


64687.210
192 


64687.211
193 


64687.212
194 


64687.213
195 


64687.214
196 


64687.215
197 


64687.216
198 


64687.217
199 


64687.218
200 


64687.219
201 


64687.220
202 


64687.221
203 


64687.222
204 


64687.223
205 


64687.224
206 


64687.225
207 


64687.226
208 


64687.227
209 


64687.228
210 


64687.229
211 


64687.230
212 


64687.231
213 


64687.232
214 


64687.233
215 


64687.234
216 


64687.235
217 


64687.236
218 


64687.237
219 


64687.238
220 


64687.239
221 


64687.240
222 


64687.241
223 


64687.242
224 


64687.243
225 


64687.244
226 


64687.245
227 


64687.257
228 


64687.258
229 


64687.259
230 


64687.260
231 


64687.261
232 


64687.262
233 


64687.263
234 


64687.264
235 


64687.265
236 


64687.266
237 


64687.267
238 


64687.268
239 


64687.269
240 


64687.270
241 


64687.271
242 


64687.272
243 


64687.273
244 


64687.274
245 


64687.108
246 


64687.109
247 


64687.110
248 


64687.111
249 


64687.112
250 


64687.113
251 


64687.114
252 


64687.115
253 


64687.116
254 


64687.117
255 


64687.118
256 


64687.119
257 


64687.121
258 


64687.122
259 


64687.123
260 


64687.124
261 


64687.125
262 


64687.126
263 


64687.127
264 


64687.128
265 


64687.129
266 


64687.130
267 


64687.297
268 


64687.298
269 


64687.299
270 


64687.300
271 


64687.301
272 

Æ 


64687.302