Ever wondered how our justice system can better support victims of sexual assault and domestic violence? Join us as Fara Gold, attorney advisor for the Office on Violence Against Women, breaks down the Department of Justice's groundbreaking framework designed to enhance the prosecution of these critical cases. This episode promises valuable insights into building collaborative relationships among prosecutors, investigators, and victim advocates, ensuring a trauma-informed approach that treats victims with the utmost humanity and respect.
We'll uncover why building trust early in the prosecutorial process is paramount and explore a comprehensive guide developed by 120 experts to strengthen community confidence and offender accountability. By dissecting societal misconceptions and the gender biases ingrained in our legal system, we highlight the necessity of treating victims with fairness and objectivity. Fara shares poignant examples and actionable strategies for overcoming these challenges, revealing how prosecutors can better meet and support victims from the onset.
Finally, we navigate the intricate landscape of prosecuting complex cases, such as those involving sexual assault by private prisoner transport officers. Fara emphasizes the significance of corroborative evidence and expert testimony in addressing trauma-induced inconsistencies in victim accounts. We also discuss the pivotal roles of victim specialists within the judicial system, offering a clearer understanding of their essential support in trial preparations. This episode is a must-listen for anyone committed to advancing justice and ensuring a compassionate, trauma-informed legal process.
Please find the prosecutor guide here: Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) | Prosecutor Guide (justice.gov)
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The subject matter of this podcast will address
difficult topics multiple formsof violence, and identity-based
discrimination and harassment.
We acknowledge that thiscontent may be difficult and
have listed specific contentwarnings in each episode
description to help create apositive, safe experience for
all listeners.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
In this country, 31 million crimes 31 million crimes
are reported every year.
That is one every second.
Out of that, every 24 minutesthere is a murder.
Every five minutes there is arape.
Every two to five minutes thereis a sexual assault.
Every nine seconds in thiscountry, a woman is assaulted by
someone who told her that heloved her, by someone who told
(00:43):
her it was her fault, by someonewho tries to tell the rest of
us it's none of our business andI am proud to stand here today
with each of you to call thatperpetrator a liar.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Welcome to the podcast on crimes against women.
I'm Maria McMullin.
In May 2024, the JusticeDepartment announced a new
resource for prosecutors ofsexual assault and domestic
violence cases, Known as theFramework for Prosecutors to
Strengthen Our National Responseto Sexual Assault and Domestic
Violence Involving Adult Victims.
(01:13):
This new guide is intended toequip prosecutors to build
provable cases in atrauma-informed manner that
treats victims with humanity andensures due process for
defendants.
Today, we're joined by FarrahGold, an attorney advisor for
the Office on Violence AgainstWomen, to learn more about this
new framework.
Farrah Gold currently serves asan attorney advisor for the
(01:38):
Office on Violence Against Womenwith the United States
Department of Justice, where shespearheaded the development of
DOJ's Framework for Prosecutorsto strengthen our national
response to sexual assault anddomestic violence.
Prior to that, she served asSpecial Litigation Counsel and
Senior Sex Crimes Counsel forDOJ's Civil Rights Division for
nearly 14 years, where shetraveled throughout the country
(01:59):
prosecuting law enforcementmisconduct cases and
bias-motivated crimes lawenforcement misconduct cases and
bias-motivated crimes.
There, Farrah developed nationalexpertise in prosecuting
government actors who committedsexual misconduct.
She has published severalarticles and conducts nationwide
trainings on effectivelyinvestigating and prosecuting
sexual misconduct.
From 2022 to 2023, Farrah servedas senior counsel on sexual
(02:24):
misconduct to the AssistantAttorney General for the Civil
Rights Division, where sheplayed an integral role in to
2023, Farrah served as seniorcounsel on sexual misconduct to
the assistant attorney generalfor the civil rights division,
where she played an integralrole in the deputy attorney
general's efforts to root outsexual abuse within federal
bureau of prisons.
Farrah was awarded the attorneygeneral's award for exceptional
service in 2014 and theattorney general's Award for
Outstanding Contributions by aNew Employee in 2012.
(02:45):
She also received the DOJ's OIGCollaboration Award for
Outstanding Contributions to theInspector General in 2023, the
FBI Director's Award forExcellence in 2021, and the
Assistant Attorney General'sAward for Distinguished Service
in 2020.
Before joining DOJ, Farrahserved as an assistant state
(03:07):
attorney for the Broward CountyState Attorney's Office in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, where shespecialized in prosecuting sex
crimes and child abuse.
Farrah also serves as anadjunct professor at Georgetown
University Law Center, where sheteaches prosecuting sex crimes
and vindicating constitutionalrights.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Farrah, welcome to the podcast.
Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
It's great to be with you and I'm really interested
about this framework that youspearheaded at the Office on
Violence Against Women.
It is the Department of Justiceframework for prosecutors to
strengthen our national responseto sexual assault and domestic
violence, in particular, withadult victims.
Now, domestic violence, sexualassault and the investigation
(03:54):
and prosecution of these caseshave been going on for decades
and decades and decades.
What prompted the creation ofthis framework?
Speaker 3 (04:03):
So in 2022, a little over two years ago the Justice
Department released updatedguidance for law enforcement on
improving responses to sexualassault and domestic violence,
and at that time, doj heard fromeveryone involved in the
criminal justice system andbeyond prosecutors, law
enforcement, victim advocatesthat there should be guidance
(04:25):
from prosecutors as well, and,of course, there should be right
, because to effectively respondto these crimes, prosecutors
and investigators need to worktogether.
So that's why you know, that'sbasically what this framework
does.
Although it's written forprosecutors, it's just as
applicable to investigators andadvocates and victim specialists
(04:45):
.
So that was the impetus behindit, and the great thing about
the idea that the JusticeDepartment is the one the entity
that put this out is that youknow the Justice Department.
I've worked here for 15 yearsand it's an extraordinary place
to work.
I still come to work every dayand I kind of can't believe it,
even though I'm about to hit my15th anniversary.
(05:07):
It really I mean, it soundsmaybe a little corny, but it
really is a privilege to workhere.
You know, I work at the Officeof Violence Against Women now.
I worked in the Civil RightsDivision for 13 and a half years
.
Before that.
I'm the honor of, you know,representing the United States.
So just to tell you a littlebit about like why it's so
important that the JusticeDepartment did this Our mission
is to uphold the rule of law, tokeep a country safe and protect
(05:29):
civil rights, and that's whatthis guide hopes to do.
And we set the standard as thedepartment and in this
particular case, set thestandard for investigating and
prosecuting these particularcrimes.
So that's a long way of sayingthat's what prompted putting
together this framework.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Yeah, it's pretty complex.
I've read most of theinformation about the framework,
and the thread that runsthroughout the whole framework
is the crucial importance of theprosecutor and victim rapport
and relationship.
This framework consists of fivecore principles that align with
this common denominator.
Can you summarize what thoseare?
Speaker 3 (06:11):
Sure, and let me say the framework is 22 and a half
pages and we wrote it to bepractical and very readable.
And I always say that, yes,there are five principles, and I
could probably do hours oftraining on each one, so I will
summarize it, but, if youindulge me, each time you ask me
I'm going to just ask yourlisteners to read it.
Okay, okay, gotcha, but thereare five principles.
(06:34):
So the first principle, as yousaid, it really focuses on the
victim.
So the first principle is torely on the evidentiary value of
the victim's account and use itto frame the investigation.
And that basically means, ifyou think about prosecuting in
general, crimes in general, weso often think about tangible
things we can hold Right, thepaper crimes, the drugs, the
(06:56):
guns, things that we can see andhold.
And the victim's account iswhat someone is telling you, but
that's how you prosecute sexcrimes, and domestic violence is
what someone is telling you,but that's how you prosecute sex
crimes and domestic violence.
The victim is the person who'sgoing to tell you what happened,
and that evidence is just asvaluable as any kind of evidence
, and the law doesn't see it anydifferently.
And so, as prosecutors, we haveto rely on that account and
(07:18):
base our investigation on it.
And so principle one talksabout how, at the end of the day
, a jury's verdict is going todepend on whether they believe
that account.
So what do we need to do tobuild our case?
And it talks about expectingcounterintuitive behavior.
Because we know that traumaaffects the way a victim might
recount what happened.
(07:38):
We know that victims may notreport right away, we know that
their accounts may not be linearAll the things that seem
counterintuitive and that thattheir accounts may not be linear
, all the things that seemcounterintuitive.
And that's what we need tolearn about.
The guide talks aboutcorroborating certain aspects of
the victim's account before andafter the crime Because, again,
the only person who can tell uswhat happened is the victim.
So that principle one reallysays rely on the evidentiary
(08:01):
value of the victim's account.
And principle two you kind ofjust follow as your principle
one, and it may sound prettyobvious, but it's meet the
victim where they are and workwith investigators and victim
specialists to do so.
Meet the victim right, like allprosecutors should meet their
victims.
And the two kind of core pointsbelow that are to have cultural
humility when you meet withyour victims, because we are all
(08:22):
different, yet there's always acommon thread, and I can talk
more about that.
And the other piece is when youmeet with a victim, have a
patience, have a plan and have apurpose.
Know why you're talking to thatperson.
Why are you not?
We're interrupting people'slives and we're talking to our
victims, so have that patience,a plan and purpose.
Principle three is use the lawand the evidentiary rules
(08:44):
strategically and effectively.
So what we mean by that is, yes, there's always room for the
law to improve.
Of course, you know I've beenon the front lines of some of
that but we have the law, wehave the tools, the evidence,
the evidentiary rules, the law,the statutes.
Even though states and tribesand military and federal
government we all differ.
We have the tools and so weshould be able to, we should use
(09:10):
those and know those.
And so it talks about statutoryviolations and evidence rules,
using experts and thinkingcarefully about privacy and
safety of our victim.
Principle four is beingthoughtful about what
accountability and justice looklike, and you know that's a
pretty broad statement, but ifwe think about it, you know it's
really easy, I guess, to lookfrom the outside in on why a
(09:31):
case resolved a certain way, whyit was a certain sentence
handed down in a plea or soforth, and this goes back to
talking to victims about youknow what they want to see
happen.
Prosecutors, we representcommunities, we represent the
people.
So the United States is afederal prosecutor and as a
state prosecutor Florida Irepresented the people of the
state of Florida.
Sometimes our goals and ourmission align with the victim.
(09:54):
Our responsibilities align.
What we want to do for thecommunity is what the victim
wants.
Sometimes they don't, and sothere are just different ways to
think about accountability, andso that's what principle four
does.
Principle five is sustaining aproductive, healthy and
committed workforce byredefining success.
You know, this is one of thosethings where we all think about
(10:17):
like you know, what does successlook like and how do we stay in
this work?
Right, as someone who is inthis work for 20 years, I want
to be able to continue doingthis work, but I also want
others to do this work, and soyou know, what do we want people
to know about in terms of ourleaders, and how do we sustain
the workforce and how do wedefine success beyond just
(10:37):
convictions?
So that was the shortest I cando to summarize, but again, I
hope everybody reads it.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
I think that was great and it really is a lot of
information.
We're going to try to dive intoeach one just a little bit with
the time that we have here onthe show Before we do that.
Help us understand if the useof this guide is federally
mandated and what, if any,measurable outcomes are applied
that can demonstrate theefficacy of this blueprint.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
So it's not federally mandated, right.
This is a resource and, like Isaid, it's, you know, the
department setting the standardfor how we hope that all of us
address sexual assault anddomestic violence.
You heard the five principles.
They're not complicated, right.
They're the stuff we should allbe doing.
We call it a blueprint becauseit's a blueprint, it's a
framework and we need to fillthat in.
(11:24):
I think, hopefully, hearing theprinciples and then, whenever
one reads it, they'll see it'snot something that even needs to
be mandated, because it'ssomething that we want to do to
get better, to serve ourcommunities better, to serve our
victims better and hold peopleaccountable, and it's all rooted
, I should have said in thebeginning, in the constitution
on our obligation to seek thetruth.
Speaker 1 (11:43):
It's also, it's also very human.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
You know, I will tell you that if anyone ever said to
me like what is your, whatwould you title it Um other than
the?
You know the framework?
Like what's your shorthandtitle?
It would be how to be a human.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
So it's funny that you said that.
Yeah, it really feels likethere's a lot of um
trauma-informed language, ofcourse, and it just feels like,
wow, this sounds like what itmeans to be a good person.
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I mean I am.
It delights me to hear you saythat because I think you know
prosecutors, some people love us, some people don't.
I think that on balance and Iwas about to say the 120 people
that I consulted with from allover the country, who've
dedicated their careers to thiswork we all want to do right by
people who are victimized.
We all want to uphold the ruleof law and follow the
(12:31):
Constitution and ensure dueprocess and, you know, sometimes
that ends in a conviction.
But at the end of the day,sometimes the only thing you can
do for someone who has survivedthese crimes is to treat them
with humanity Right, and I thinkthat's why I mean that
certainly was the impetus as towhy I became a prosecutor was to
treat people with humanity.
So it really does warm my heartto hear you say that about it.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
Yeah, great, yeah how about measurables.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
So it's interesting that you say of measurables and
you're not the first person tobring that up.
So this, this guide, was thecompilation or consensus of 120
experts across the country, likeI just mentioned, and when I
say 120 experts, I meanprosecutors, advocates,
investigators, academics, peoplewho have dedicated their
careers to combating thesecrimes at all levels of
(13:18):
government federal, state,tribal, military and rural
jurisdictions, urban, suburban,everything.
And so this is what everyone issaying.
These are over the decades ofwhat I've done that works.
So it's almost like we're goingbackward in time for
measurables.
We're saying we already knowwhat works.
We want to share our knowledgewith everyone across the country
.
So we know that success,however you define it, will come
(13:42):
by implementing theseprinciples.
You know.
I think over time, ifprosecutors' offices implement
them and follow them, I thinkyou will see more trust in the
community, because victims willtrust prosecutors.
Right, it like trickles downwithin a community.
Right, if somebody has a goodexperience, even if it's, you
know, it's not a good experienceoverall.
(14:04):
Right, if you have to findyourself in a courtroom.
But if someone is treated towhat you said before, treated
with humanity and felt like theyare heard and have their
questions answered.
You know that's going to,that's going to resonate
throughout the community and somaybe that will happen with
someone.
They will have, you know, avalidating experience and then
if something like this happensto a friend or a loved one,
(14:27):
they'll say you know what?
It's okay to go and talk to thepolice, it's okay to talk to
the prosecutors.
So I think that I think you maysee more cases brought, because
one of the I would say theoverall kind of message behind
this framework is this frameworktalks about meritorious or
potentially meritoriousallegations.
So for sure, there are going tobe cases we can't bring right.
(14:48):
This doesn't suggest thateveryone is always telling the
truth, but what it does is sayto everyone you know, look at
the facts, look at the law,think about what a properly
instructed jury would do, notwhat an imagined jury would do.
And then, and you know, thesecases are provable and here's
how you prove them.
So, bring the cases.
If the victim is on board, youknow, if the law and the facts
(15:10):
support it, bring the cases.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Yeah, I had kind of wondered when I was reading
through this if it wouldencourage more people to report
and, you know, participate incases like this.
And when you first startedtalking about the five
principles, you emphasized themeeting, and the meeting with
prosecutor and the victim isespecially valuable.
(15:35):
I always kind of assumed theywere meeting, Is that not true?
Speaker 3 (15:40):
You know, I think sometimes prosecutors don't meet
victims until sometimes mayberight before trial or late in
the game or don't spend a lot oftime.
I think that happens probablymore often with misdemeanor
domestic violence cases wherethe volume is so great.
But yeah, I mean it shouldhappen.
But I unfortunately have heardpeople who say you know victims
(16:01):
who've never met with theirprosecutors and I think on the
whole people probably do.
But I think this emphasizesmeeting with your victims as
early as possible ininvestigation and having a
meaningful meeting right, morethan just in the hallway or, you
know, right before you go totrial.
I mean, you know, when you're avery young prosecutor and you
(16:22):
have lots of misdemeanor cases,even though they're serious
domestic cases, because of thevolume, sometimes that hallway
meeting is there.
You know that's not ideal, it'sunfortunate because of the
volume, but I'm.
But in general, I mean I camefrom and this is going back my
early part of my career.
You know, 20 years ago I camefrom the Broward County State
Attorney's Office in FortLauderdale where we had huge
(16:42):
caseloads.
You know I had 90 sex crimes atany given moment, but I met with
every single one of my victimsand it's a lot of work, but you
do the work up front and it paysdividends, because I mean to
your question about why it's soimportant, I mean it helps you
evaluate your case.
First of all, do you have a case?
What statutes Prosecutors thinkabout elements of crimes and
what we can prove?
Because that's what we need toknow, what we can prove beyond
(17:05):
reasonable doubt.
Right, that's our obligation,but it also gives that we need
information from victims to filecertain pre-trial motions,
right, I won't get into theweeds of that, but that's how we
protect their privacy, how weprotect the case.
We need, you know, and we arethe ones who have to stand there
in a courtroom with them asthey sit from their perpetrator
talking about one, probably oneof the most heinous things
(17:27):
that's ever happened to them andit's stressful and it's scary
and it's traumatic.
And so they need to trust us,right, and that trust doesn't
happen overnight, and so if wecan meet with them early and
start laying that groundwork,that pays dividends in that
courtroom.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
Yeah, and speaking of that, you know victim integrity
and offender accountability aretwo of the prevailing and
guiding forces behind theframework.
What do you feel is the publicperception of how sexual assault
and domestic violence cases arehandled?
Speaker 3 (17:58):
You know, I don't know what the perception is in
terms of how they're handled,but I do think and maybe this is
in line with it, I think youknow that the public is
skeptical of bringing sexualassault and domestic violence
cases.
They're skeptical of victims,skeptical of bringing sexual
assault and domestic violencecases, skeptical of victims.
And in developing thisframework and even before, when
(18:19):
I was prosecuting civil rightscrimes, I was going all over the
country.
That's how it worked.
I was based in DC and I'd goover the country.
I prosecuted law enforcement,sexual misconduct all over the
country and you know I brought alot of cases.
But sometimes there washesitance to bring cases,
hesitance to investigate cases,and it wasn't necessarily about
the law or the facts, but it wasabout some fallacies in society
(18:40):
and I think that affects, youknow, all of us juries, right,
and so when I say fallacies andthis is in the guide you can see
kind of like woven in thingslike it's he said, she said, and
it can't be proven.
All we have is the victim'saccount, which we know is
evidence, right, victims lieabout rape and domestic violence
(19:01):
, like we hear that all the time, and so because of all that
society thinks we can't provethese cases.
You know, it kind of ittrickles down all over.
Those are the juries that weare in front of, and so I think
that's the perception right,that like we can't handle it, we
can't bring these cases becausewe can't prove them, because of
those fallacies about the law,about misperceptions, about
(19:22):
victim behavior and things ofthat nature.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I am curious about, like why the public perception
of victims is so negative anduntrusting when it comes to the
sexual assault cases.
Yeah, and.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
I don't know that this is so much opinion, right?
I think you can kind of read itin the guide, so I will just.
I would just say this you know,if you think about, you know if
a I mean most.
Let me start by saying this weknow that most victims of sexual
assault and domestic violenceare women.
Of course, anyone can be avictim of sexual assault or
domestic violence and I don'twant to take anything away from
that.
(19:56):
But let's think of a robberyvictim and let's say that the
robbery victim is a man who iswell-dressed, in a business suit
, who is out at happy hour and,you know, had a few drinks, and
he walks outside the bar andhe's robbed and his watch is
stolen and he goes to the policedepartment.
And he walks outside the barand he's robbed and his watch is
stolen and he goes to thepolice department and he makes a
report.
The police investigate.
I mean, that's it.
They investigate, right?
(20:17):
They're not saying yes, ithappened, no, it didn't, they
are investigating.
You know they're not saying,well, you wore that fancy suit
or what did you?
You know what'd you think wasgoing to happen when you, like,
were drinking?
Or well, are you sure youdidn't give him your watch,
right.
You didn't consent, right,right, I mean.
(20:40):
And if you think about it like,well, why?
Why is why?
Is the opposite true for sexassault and domestic violence
victims?
Right, like, what were youwearing?
What were you drinking?
Are you sure you didn't want todo it?
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Right when the victim is very clear.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
no, no, no I didn't want to do it and it's a.
It's a large part, and this isreally part of the framework.
It says it flat out.
I mean, this is a large partbecause those victims are
predominantly women, and this isall based in misogynistic
tropes.
And this the guide says it flatout.
Right, why are these casesunderreported, underinvestigated
, underprosecuted?
(21:06):
Because there is thisinclination to disbelieve.
And for sure, this guy does notsay automatically believe, you
know, but what it does say issuspend that disbelief,
investigate like you would anyother case.
That is what ensures ourobjectivity.
We want to be objective and so,instead of making these
assumptions, somebody must havebeen drinking, so therefore,
(21:28):
right, they must have consent orwhatever the assumption is like
.
Suspend disbelief and justinvestigate, be objective.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Yeah, we talk about this all the time, about how if
a stranger came up on the streetand punched me in the face, it
would be he would be arrested.
It would be a crime wascommitted.
He came up and just assaultedme.
Yes, if I'm in my own home andmy my own partner or spouse
(21:56):
punches me in the face, that's aprivate matter.
That is may or may not bedomestic violence.
I may or may not haveinstigated it and participated
in violence, and I probablywon't be believed that this was
a pattern of abuse.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
Yeah, and that probably won't be believed.
That is what makes it sodifficult and why people don't
want to report because theycan't.
They are worried that no one isgoing to believe them.
And if I could kind of justbring it, you know, kind of full
circle to your comment beforeabout like humanity, like that's
what we can do for thesevictims I'm not saying
automatically believe someonewhen they come in, but you know,
(22:34):
we can treat them like humansand when we do believe them we
can say and tell them we believethem forward for whatever
reason, sometimes a victim justbeing said, being told I believe
you is really all.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
They want that validation right that in fact
this did happen.
That is exactly what Dr JudithHerman said in her latest book
Truth and Repair that victimswant to be believed and they
want to be believed by thepeople who matter.
They want to be believed bytheir families.
They want to be believed by lawenforcement, prosecutors, the
general public.
(23:18):
They don't care as much aboutthe consequences to the
perpetrator, as it is thatpeople won't say that they're
lying and understand that thisreally happened.
Yeah, I think that depends, andthat's why the guide says over
and over again.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
talk to.
Yeah, I think that depends andthat's why the guide says over
and over again, talk to thevictim, right?
The best way to know what avictim wants is to ask them.
And I often say when I dotrainings if you do in fact
believe the victim, tell them.
I mean, it's a decision aprosecutor needs to make at any
given stage of a case.
Certainly when we are sittingat that table arguing in front
(23:52):
of a jury, the reason we'rethere is because we believe the
victim.
We can't vouch for that, wecan't make that argument, but
that's why we're there, becausewe have determined that the
victim is credible and we can goforward.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
So is it true that prosecutors typically do not
pursue cases that they feelstrongly they cannot win, and
how would the framework helpaddress that?
Speaker 3 (24:11):
So I wouldn't look at it in terms of what can we win.
I mean, the standard forbringing a case is if you have
evidence to sustain a conviction, right, can you use the facts
and the law to prove thedefendant guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.
And what the framework does isremind prosecutors that we are
talking about a properlyinstructed jury.
(24:32):
That means so in a trial, thejudge gives the jury
instructions.
They're instructed on the law.
It's a set of instructionswhich I often say to prosecutors
and investigators.
You should know thoseinstructions from the very
beginning of your investigationbecause you want to know how a
jury is going to look at theevidence.
So the idea is that we want tosay to prosecutors don't think
so much about what an imaginedjury is going to do.
(24:53):
Oh, a jury is going to look atthe evidence.
So the idea is that we want tosay to prosecutors don't think
so much about what an imaginedjury is going to do.
Oh, a jury is never going toconvict because the victim was
in custody.
I mean, I used to prosecute,like I said, law enforcement,
sexual misconduct.
All of my cases, all of myvictims, had baked in
credibility deficits.
They were in custody, jail andunder arrest on probation.
But the issue is like can weprove the case?
And so she started worryingabout I don't know if the jury
(25:15):
is going to believe her becauseshe was intoxicated Like what.
Can she not remember whathappened?
Versus just because she wasdrinking, right?
Or oh, she doesn't speakEnglish, well, or whatever you
name it.
Whatever reason, it is what thequestion needs to be is do you
have the evidence, do you havethe facts?
And and it is what the questionneeds to be is do you have the
evidence, do you have the facts?
And what is the law?
And, using the framework, theblueprint that we gave you,
(25:38):
these cases are in fact,provable, and I think we get
hung up a lot of times on thelack of physical evidence or the
lack of eyewitnesses.
These cases you're not going tohave dispositive physical
evidence, you're rarely going tohave eyewitnesses right, and so
you have to rely on thevictim's account.
You know, the line I often use,which dates back to when I was
(25:58):
a state prosecutor, is thesecrimes don't happen in front of
an audience, which is a line I'msure I stole from one of my
colleagues a million years ago.
So I I I bequeath it to anyoneelse who wants to use it.
But I mean, that's the reality.
So we have to show a jury whythey can believe that victim.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
So how do you maybe give us an example of how you
shift that mindset for the juryand for prosecutors to be able
to work with victims andunderstand the difference
between, let's say, cases theycan win, victims being hesitant,
victims being uncooperative andstuff like that?
Speaker 3 (26:33):
So nowhere in the guide or the framework is there
the word uncooperative, right?
We don't actually.
I don't actually talk aboutuncooperative victims, right,
because I think we can flakehesitance with lack of
cooperation.
I mean, it completely makessense why somebody would be
hesitant, maybe wouldn't want toparticipate on any given day,
(26:56):
right, because we all have busy,crazy lives and lots going on
and I, as a prosecutor,represent a really bad time in
that person's life and theydon't want to dredge it up.
And so I would say to anyprosecutor, any investigator
tomorrow's another day, right,trial is a long road, and so
that's why it is so important towork with victim specialists to
(27:17):
continue that relationship withvictims.
You know, to build that casearound a victim's account.
That's why that interview is soimportant and I encourage, if
you can and I often did this asa federal prosecutor working
with our investigators early onto interview victims, because we
as prosecutors know theelements that we need to meet.
Right, those are the parts of acrime where we have to prove to
a jury, and we know the kind ofinformation we need and even
(27:39):
the smallest details.
You know, and I would say this,not everyone's going to
remember every detail.
It's part of human nature andcertainly part of traumatic
memory.
But whatever details a victimgives, we can corroborate
details leading up to and afterright, and that buttresses
corroborates someone's account.
I mean, I'll just give you asmall example of what that might
look like.
(28:00):
I had a case several years agoinvolving a private prisoner
transport officer who sexuallyassaulted women all over the
country.
He would transport them onout-of-state warrants and take
circuitous routes and drive intosecular locations and sexually
assault them and it's a prettybrutal case.
He's convicted, he's in prisonfor life and I think those women
all feel safe and I think theyfeel vindicated.
But who is the witness to eachone of those crimes?
(28:22):
The victim right, no one else.
And they are all in custody anda lot of them are in custody on
low-level crimes.
They were in custody and hecapitalized on that right.
He told them no one wouldbelieve them.
But you know we had I mean thisis a longer story, I used to do
trainings on it but one exampleis that a victim told us that
when he drove into this secludedarea it was outside of Little
(28:43):
Rock, arkansas.
He stopped for about 45 minutes.
Well, we got his cell site dataright, his pings from his cell
phone around that time and itshowed that he didn't move for
about 45 minutes when he shouldhave been moving.
He should have been droppingher off at the next jail.
So does that 45 minute gapprove that he raped her?
No, but it certainlycorroborates her.
It lends credence to heraccount.
(29:04):
What was he doing when hestopped for 45 minutes?
So that's like one tiny example, and if you do that as much as
you can those tiny examples addup and paint a compelling
picture for a jury.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
So can the same type of framework or something
similar be applied to defenseattorneys and how they can work
with prosecutors to kind ofovercome obstacles of issues
with presenting evidence,victims being hesitant and so
forth?
Speaker 3 (29:30):
Defense attorneys have a job to do, right, they're
going, they, you know certainly.
Defense attorneys have a job todo, right, they're going, they,
you know certainly, in trial,their objective is to create,
you know, to argue that there'sreasonable doubt to get their
client acquitted.
Defense attorneys, therefore,are going to use a lot of what
we see as hallmarks of trauma totheir advantage.
So I don't think they're goingto work with us so much, right?
(29:50):
No-transcript.
(30:19):
You know, on cross-examination,if a victim sounds scattered or
, you know, has disclosed overtime and is therefore
inconsistent, you know, I don'tknow that I would say that that
is inconsistent, but that's theargument they're going to make
to a jury.
Is that, if this reallyhappened, why didn't she tell
the prosecutor everything rightaway, Right Like?
you know, you know why is it?
You know, if it really happened, why couldn't she give us the
(30:41):
events in order?
And so the defense attorney isgoing to use those, use trauma
Right To to argue reasonabledoubt to a jury.
To argue reasonable doubt to ajury.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
But then the trauma.
The science of trauma clearlyindicates that a person who
experiences a traumatic eventmay or may not remember the
details in the right order or atall or at any one point in time
.
They may remember things overtime.
So defense attorneys shouldreally read about this, because
we're on to like theirstrategies right.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Well, I'm sure they know that and I think that's why
you know your trials are nottrials.
There's very little, I mean,there's always like a moment
that you don't expect, butoverall we know it's going to
happen.
And so the traumatic memory Ithink all the things you just
(31:33):
said is a lot of times whyprosecutors will call experts at
trial to explain to the juryhow traumatic memory works.
Right, so that we can educatethe jury and tell them yeah, I
mean, this is why the victimsounds scattered or nonlinear.
That doesn't mean the defenseattorney won't argue that they
are scattered and nonlinearbecause they're lying.
I mean, this is not a mystery.
The defense to every domesticviolence and sexual assault,
(31:54):
particularly where theoffender's identity is known
right, because most of these weknow the offender the defense is
going to be the victim's line,for whatever reason or no reason
.
Speaker 1 (32:04):
And so that's who we have to work against, and we've
seen so many examples of thisrecently, especially with the
hashtag MeToo and the MeToomovement.
So, because the cases reallyexploded, I guess you know in in
they've increased so much, andthe framework talks about the
importance of using victimspecialists.
(32:24):
To your point, could youexplain the role of a victim
specialist and, for those outthere listening who are
interested in serving in anadvocacy capacity, how can one
become a victim specialist?
Speaker 3 (32:37):
Yeah, so we use the term victim specialist in the
framework.
That is the term that we use inthe federal government for
those victim advocates who workin prosecutor's offices with our
federal law enforcementpartners to help the victim
through the process.
In the Violence Against WomenAct the term that's used is
victim assistant, and thenthere's also victim advocates
(33:00):
within the community.
So it is important todistinguish between those victim
specialists that are inprosecutor and law enforcement
agencies versus those advocatesthat are in community-based
settings.
The significance is thepresence of privilege, meaning
that a victim specialist that Iwork with in a prosecutor's
office doesn't have privilegewith a victim, right?
(33:21):
So the things that they say isnot covered by any sort of
privilege, whereas incommunity-based advocates there
may be privilege.
Community-based advocates arethe ones who can provide
counseling, maybe more safetyplanning, and so when we talk
about victim specialists, I'mtalking about the people that I
work with in the prosecutor'soffice and they're so important
(33:44):
because I mean for multiplereasons.
First of all, they need me bymy like representative, my envoy
, if, if a victim is hesitant totalk to a prosecutor, you know,
talk about um in principle, inprinciple to meeting with the
victim, having cultural humilitysometimes look.
I am a firm believer thatthere's always a thread.
You could always find some wayto relate to someone.
(34:05):
But I knew, for example, like Isaid, I was traveling all over
the country handling these cases.
I am I know you can't tell thisfrom.
Maybe you can hear a little bitof my voice.
I grew up in New York.
I am an East Coast person.
I walk with crutches youwouldn't know that from seeing
me on Zoom or hearing me on thepodcast and if I show up in
tribal lands or in the middle ofOklahoma because I worked for
(34:28):
the Justice Department and I'mcoming in from DC.
So victim advocates, victimspecialists, can bridge that gap
.
I think we all can.
We can find commonality.
The other thing is that victimspecialists can refer victims to
(34:51):
services things like counseling, things like crime victims
compensation.
Help them with safety planning,because we want victims to be
stable.
Not only is it a human thing todo, but the more stable a
victim is, the better they'regoing to do when they have to
testify, because it's rough andthen just thinking about things
like testing at trial.
You know I am in there with thatvictim.
I will prepare them.
(35:11):
Until they feel prepared, Iwill go and show them the
courtroom and everything.
They may want to go see thecourt more than once and I'm
preparing for trial.
I can't or they may and rightlyso need someone to sit with
them before they testify.
Absolutely, we should havesomeone sitting with the victim
before, but I'm in the courtroomcalling the witness before when
they're done testifying.
They've just been through theringer, it's tough, so they need
(35:34):
someone who can sit with themafterward.
I can't because I have to callmy next witness.
So my victim specialist isthere.
I mean, they are indispensable.
It sounds funny, but some of myclosest friends are the victim
specialists I work with becausethey're so integral, because
they help bridge that gap.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
It takes a village and I don't I don't say that,
like you know, to be flip oranything, but it really does in
a lot of situations and it'sgoing to take more people than
just the prosecutor to get someof this done.
I mentioned that prisontransport case.
Speaker 3 (36:02):
When we tried that case, it was me and my colleague
were the prosecutors, but wehad seven victims testify from
all over the country and theyall had to fly into the
jurisdiction where we wereprosecuting it.
But they all needed someone.
We didn't really want to evenput them in taxi cabs in the
airport because they weresexually assaulted during
transports, right.
So you have to think about whoyou know.
(36:24):
Who's going to pick them upfrom the airport?
Who's going to sit with thembefore they testify?
We couldn't have them sittingtogether, so like we had to have
a lot of different people workwith them and just be there for
them while my colleague and Iwere in the courtroom.
So it took a village for sure.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
Yeah, yeah.
I mean and these are all thingsthat have evolved over time
having all of these services andlayers to support victims who
experienced domestic violenceand sexual assault this is not.
This is new.
Basically, a lot of theservices that you're talking
about.
How would judges benefit fromunderstanding the framework?
Speaker 3 (36:58):
So I think anyone can benefit from reading the
framework because, as I saidbefore, it was written to be
readable and encouraging andpractical.
It is 22 and a half pagesincluding the footnotes.
So I've heard from judges whohave read it who have found it
helpful.
You know, judges need to knowabout the dynamics of sexual
assault and domestic violence,like everyone else who works in
(37:20):
this space.
The framework helps inform themabout all of that.
Where does it come in?
If my victim needs a break intrial, the judge will better
understand why.
If I need a continuance becauseeven though a victim was
participating the whole time andis suddenly hesitant, the judge
may understand why there aregoing to be issues in jury
selection that we have toaddress and the judge may have a
(37:43):
better understanding.
I mean, I'll tell you this as Igot older and worked on these
cases more.
Perhaps it's because of me too,I don't know, but jurors
disclose more now than when Ifirst started their own
experiences of sexual assaultand domestic violence.
So judges understand thedynamics of it.
They'll be better equipped todeal with it.
So I think for sure just abetter understanding of these
(38:05):
kinds of crimes can help anyonein this space.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
Yeah, for sure You're right and you alluded to early
on the idea of vicarious trauma,of being in this work for so
long, and it can be reallyheightened for prosecutors.
What recommendations could youshare for those who may be
reluctant to continue or evenenter this field of work?
Speaker 3 (38:28):
So I am no expert on vicarious trauma by any means.
I mean I obviously I'm not inthe courtroom right now, but I'm
still working on this and Iteach it and I train and all of
that.
What I would say is, being aprosecutor, we have an immense
amount of power, but we can usethose.
I mean we can.
We should use our powercarefully and under and wield it
(38:50):
with the Constitution in mindand we can do a lot of good
because of it, both fordefendants and victims.
Right, because we are the oneswho make decisions as to whether
you know, like, if a stop isunconstitutional, we can
recognize that and we make surethat we adhere to due process
rights.
We provide everything indiscovery and so forth, and we
can also make a big differencein our community and in the
(39:12):
lives of our victims.
So I think being a prosecutoris one of the maybe the best
legal job you can possibly have.
It is the highest of highswhich outweigh when there is the
lowest of lows, because some ofthose days are pretty hard.
But I would say that you know,principle five talks about
sustaining a healthy workforceand a lot of that is on on our
(39:33):
leaders, on our supervisors.
But I really do hope that, yes,I want people to stay in this
work, but I really hope you knowI teach law students.
I really do hope that, yes, Iwant people to see in this work,
but I really hope you know Iteach law students.
I really hope that law studentsconsider this work.
I decided I wanted to be aprosecutor a sex crimes
prosecutor when I was asophomore in college, which is
pretty early, and I'm so happy Idid because it is the greatest.
I mean the idea that you canhelp someone and and be that, be
(39:55):
that conduit for humanity.
It's just the greatest thingever.
So I would just say to anyonelike, yes, it is rough, but
nothing worth doing is easy,right, and the rewards outweigh
the hardships 100%.
So this framework is supposedto.
I mean, I'm just going to sayit is written in the first
person.
It is written with 120 peopletelling you like this works and
(40:16):
we're all here for you, and soit is.
It kind of is a symbol of thiscommunity practice around the
country.
It is encouraging because wewant everyone to do well and so
we want you know people who gointo this work know that there
is support right, there issupport out there from those of
us who've been doing it all overthe place, and so I hope people
consider doing it, because itis really some of the most
rewarding work you could do.
Speaker 1 (40:37):
Thank you so much for talking with me today.
Oh no, of course it's mypleasure.
Thank you.
If you would like to read theframework and related
announcements, you can findthose on the DOJ website at
justicegov.
Thanks so much for listening.
Until next time, stay safe.
The 2025 Conference on CrimesAgainst Women will take place in
Dallas, Texas, May 19th throughthe 22nd at the Sheraton Dallas
(41:01):
.
Learn more and register atconferencecaworg, and follow us
on social media at national CCAW.
The subject matter of this podcast will address
difficult topics multiple formsof violence, and identity-based
discrimination and harassment.
We acknowledge that thiscontent may be difficult and
have listed specific contentwarnings in each episode
description to help create apositive, safe experience for
all listeners.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
In this country, 31 million crimes 31 million crimes
are reported every year.
That is one every second.
Out of that, every 24 minutesthere is a murder.
Every five minutes there is arape.
Every two to five minutes thereis a sexual assault.
Every nine seconds in thiscountry, a woman is assaulted by
someone who told her that heloved her, by someone who told
(00:43):
her it was her fault, by someonewho tries to tell the rest of
us it's none of our business andI am proud to stand here today
with each of you to call thatperpetrator a liar.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Welcome to the podcast on crimes against women.
I'm Maria McMullin.
In May 2024, the JusticeDepartment announced a new
resource for prosecutors ofsexual assault and domestic
violence cases, Known as theFramework for Prosecutors to
Strengthen Our National Responseto Sexual Assault and Domestic
Violence Involving Adult Victims.
(01:13):
This new guide is intended toequip prosecutors to build
provable cases in atrauma-informed manner that
treats victims with humanity andensures due process for
defendants.
Today, we're joined by FarrahGold, an attorney advisor for
the Office on Violence AgainstWomen, to learn more about this
new framework.
Farrah Gold currently serves asan attorney advisor for the
(01:38):
Office on Violence Against Womenwith the United States
Department of Justice, where shespearheaded the development of
DOJ's Framework for Prosecutorsto strengthen our national
response to sexual assault anddomestic violence.
Prior to that, she served asSpecial Litigation Counsel and
Senior Sex Crimes Counsel forDOJ's Civil Rights Division for
nearly 14 years, where shetraveled throughout the country
(01:59):
prosecuting law enforcementmisconduct cases and
bias-motivated crimes lawenforcement misconduct cases and
bias-motivated crimes.
There, Farrah developed nationalexpertise in prosecuting
government actors who committedsexual misconduct.
She has published severalarticles and conducts nationwide
trainings on effectivelyinvestigating and prosecuting
sexual misconduct.
From 2022 to 2023, Farrah servedas senior counsel on sexual
(02:24):
misconduct to the AssistantAttorney General for the Civil
Rights Division, where sheplayed an integral role in to
2023, Farrah served as seniorcounsel on sexual misconduct to
the assistant attorney generalfor the civil rights division,
where she played an integralrole in the deputy attorney
general's efforts to root outsexual abuse within federal
bureau of prisons.
Farrah was awarded the attorneygeneral's award for exceptional
service in 2014 and theattorney general's Award for
Outstanding Contributions by aNew Employee in 2012.
(02:45):
She also received the DOJ's OIGCollaboration Award for
Outstanding Contributions to theInspector General in 2023, the
FBI Director's Award forExcellence in 2021, and the
Assistant Attorney General'sAward for Distinguished Service
in 2020.
Before joining DOJ, Farrahserved as an assistant state
(03:07):
attorney for the Broward CountyState Attorney's Office in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, where shespecialized in prosecuting sex
crimes and child abuse.
Farrah also serves as anadjunct professor at Georgetown
University Law Center, where sheteaches prosecuting sex crimes
and vindicating constitutionalrights.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Farrah, welcome to the podcast.
Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
It's great to be with you and I'm really interested
about this framework that youspearheaded at the Office on
Violence Against Women.
It is the Department of Justiceframework for prosecutors to
strengthen our national responseto sexual assault and domestic
violence, in particular, withadult victims.
Now, domestic violence, sexualassault and the investigation
(03:54):
and prosecution of these caseshave been going on for decades
and decades and decades.
What prompted the creation ofthis framework?
Speaker 3 (04:03):
So in 2022, a little over two years ago the Justice
Department released updatedguidance for law enforcement on
improving responses to sexualassault and domestic violence,
and at that time, doj heard fromeveryone involved in the
criminal justice system andbeyond prosecutors, law
enforcement, victim advocatesthat there should be guidance
(04:25):
from prosecutors as well, and,of course, there should be right
, because to effectively respondto these crimes, prosecutors
and investigators need to worktogether.
So that's why you know, that'sbasically what this framework
does.
Although it's written forprosecutors, it's just as
applicable to investigators andadvocates and victim specialists
(04:45):
.
So that was the impetus behindit, and the great thing about
the idea that the JusticeDepartment is the one the entity
that put this out is that youknow the Justice Department.
I've worked here for 15 yearsand it's an extraordinary place
to work.
I still come to work every dayand I kind of can't believe it,
even though I'm about to hit my15th anniversary.
(05:07):
It really I mean, it soundsmaybe a little corny, but it
really is a privilege to workhere.
You know, I work at the Officeof Violence Against Women now.
I worked in the Civil RightsDivision for 13 and a half years
.
Before that.
I'm the honor of, you know,representing the United States.
So just to tell you a littlebit about like why it's so
important that the JusticeDepartment did this Our mission
is to uphold the rule of law, tokeep a country safe and protect
(05:29):
civil rights, and that's whatthis guide hopes to do.
And we set the standard as thedepartment and in this
particular case, set thestandard for investigating and
prosecuting these particularcrimes.
So that's a long way of sayingthat's what prompted putting
together this framework.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Yeah, it's pretty complex.
I've read most of theinformation about the framework,
and the thread that runsthroughout the whole framework
is the crucial importance of theprosecutor and victim rapport
and relationship.
This framework consists of fivecore principles that align with
this common denominator.
Can you summarize what thoseare?
Speaker 3 (06:11):
Sure, and let me say the framework is 22 and a half
pages and we wrote it to bepractical and very readable.
And I always say that, yes,there are five principles, and I
could probably do hours oftraining on each one, so I will
summarize it, but, if youindulge me, each time you ask me
I'm going to just ask yourlisteners to read it.
Okay, okay, gotcha, but thereare five principles.
(06:34):
So the first principle, as yousaid, it really focuses on the
victim.
So the first principle is torely on the evidentiary value of
the victim's account and use itto frame the investigation.
And that basically means, ifyou think about prosecuting in
general, crimes in general, weso often think about tangible
things we can hold Right, thepaper crimes, the drugs, the
(06:56):
guns, things that we can see andhold.
And the victim's account iswhat someone is telling you, but
that's how you prosecute sexcrimes, and domestic violence is
what someone is telling you,but that's how you prosecute sex
crimes and domestic violence.
The victim is the person who'sgoing to tell you what happened,
and that evidence is just asvaluable as any kind of evidence
, and the law doesn't see it anydifferently.
And so, as prosecutors, we haveto rely on that account and
(07:18):
base our investigation on it.
And so principle one talksabout how, at the end of the day
, a jury's verdict is going todepend on whether they believe
that account.
So what do we need to do tobuild our case?
And it talks about expectingcounterintuitive behavior.
Because we know that traumaaffects the way a victim might
recount what happened.
(07:38):
We know that victims may notreport right away, we know that
their accounts may not be linearAll the things that seem
counterintuitive and that thattheir accounts may not be linear
, all the things that seemcounterintuitive.
And that's what we need tolearn about.
The guide talks aboutcorroborating certain aspects of
the victim's account before andafter the crime Because, again,
the only person who can tell uswhat happened is the victim.
So that principle one reallysays rely on the evidentiary
(08:01):
value of the victim's account.
And principle two you kind ofjust follow as your principle
one, and it may sound prettyobvious, but it's meet the
victim where they are and workwith investigators and victim
specialists to do so.
Meet the victim right, like allprosecutors should meet their
victims.
And the two kind of core pointsbelow that are to have cultural
humility when you meet withyour victims, because we are all
(08:22):
different, yet there's always acommon thread, and I can talk
more about that.
And the other piece is when youmeet with a victim, have a
patience, have a plan and have apurpose.
Know why you're talking to thatperson.
Why are you not?
We're interrupting people'slives and we're talking to our
victims, so have that patience,a plan and purpose.
Principle three is use the lawand the evidentiary rules
(08:44):
strategically and effectively.
So what we mean by that is, yes, there's always room for the
law to improve.
Of course, you know I've beenon the front lines of some of
that but we have the law, wehave the tools, the evidence,
the evidentiary rules, the law,the statutes.
Even though states and tribesand military and federal
government we all differ.
We have the tools and so weshould be able to, we should use
(09:10):
those and know those.
And so it talks about statutoryviolations and evidence rules,
using experts and thinkingcarefully about privacy and
safety of our victim.
Principle four is beingthoughtful about what
accountability and justice looklike, and you know that's a
pretty broad statement, but ifwe think about it, you know it's
really easy, I guess, to lookfrom the outside in on why a
(09:31):
case resolved a certain way, whyit was a certain sentence
handed down in a plea or soforth, and this goes back to
talking to victims about youknow what they want to see
happen.
Prosecutors, we representcommunities, we represent the
people.
So the United States is afederal prosecutor and as a
state prosecutor Florida Irepresented the people of the
state of Florida.
Sometimes our goals and ourmission align with the victim.
(09:54):
Our responsibilities align.
What we want to do for thecommunity is what the victim
wants.
Sometimes they don't, and sothere are just different ways to
think about accountability, andso that's what principle four
does.
Principle five is sustaining aproductive, healthy and
committed workforce byredefining success.
You know, this is one of thosethings where we all think about
(10:17):
like you know, what does successlook like and how do we stay in
this work?
Right, as someone who is inthis work for 20 years, I want
to be able to continue doingthis work, but I also want
others to do this work, and soyou know, what do we want people
to know about in terms of ourleaders, and how do we sustain
the workforce and how do wedefine success beyond just
(10:37):
convictions?
So that was the shortest I cando to summarize, but again, I
hope everybody reads it.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
I think that was great and it really is a lot of
information.
We're going to try to dive intoeach one just a little bit with
the time that we have here onthe show Before we do that.
Help us understand if the useof this guide is federally
mandated and what, if any,measurable outcomes are applied
that can demonstrate theefficacy of this blueprint.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
So it's not federally mandated, right.
This is a resource and, like Isaid, it's, you know, the
department setting the standardfor how we hope that all of us
address sexual assault anddomestic violence.
You heard the five principles.
They're not complicated, right.
They're the stuff we should allbe doing.
We call it a blueprint becauseit's a blueprint, it's a
framework and we need to fillthat in.
(11:24):
I think, hopefully, hearing theprinciples and then, whenever
one reads it, they'll see it'snot something that even needs to
be mandated, because it'ssomething that we want to do to
get better, to serve ourcommunities better, to serve our
victims better and hold peopleaccountable, and it's all rooted
, I should have said in thebeginning, in the constitution
on our obligation to seek thetruth.
Speaker 1 (11:43):
It's also, it's also very human.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
You know, I will tell you that if anyone ever said to
me like what is your, whatwould you title it Um other than
the?
You know the framework?
Like what's your shorthandtitle?
It would be how to be a human.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
So it's funny that you said that.
Yeah, it really feels likethere's a lot of um
trauma-informed language, ofcourse, and it just feels like,
wow, this sounds like what itmeans to be a good person.
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I mean I am.
It delights me to hear you saythat because I think you know
prosecutors, some people love us, some people don't.
I think that on balance and Iwas about to say the 120 people
that I consulted with from allover the country, who've
dedicated their careers to thiswork we all want to do right by
people who are victimized.
We all want to uphold the ruleof law and follow the
(12:31):
Constitution and ensure dueprocess and, you know, sometimes
that ends in a conviction.
But at the end of the day,sometimes the only thing you can
do for someone who has survivedthese crimes is to treat them
with humanity Right, and I thinkthat's why I mean that
certainly was the impetus as towhy I became a prosecutor was to
treat people with humanity.
So it really does warm my heartto hear you say that about it.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
Yeah, great, yeah how about measurables.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
So it's interesting that you say of measurables and
you're not the first person tobring that up.
So this, this guide, was thecompilation or consensus of 120
experts across the country, likeI just mentioned, and when I
say 120 experts, I meanprosecutors, advocates,
investigators, academics, peoplewho have dedicated their
careers to combating thesecrimes at all levels of
(13:18):
government federal, state,tribal, military and rural
jurisdictions, urban, suburban,everything.
And so this is what everyone issaying.
These are over the decades ofwhat I've done that works.
So it's almost like we're goingbackward in time for
measurables.
We're saying we already knowwhat works.
We want to share our knowledgewith everyone across the country
.
So we know that success,however you define it, will come
(13:42):
by implementing theseprinciples.
You know.
I think over time, ifprosecutors' offices implement
them and follow them, I thinkyou will see more trust in the
community, because victims willtrust prosecutors.
Right, it like trickles downwithin a community.
Right, if somebody has a goodexperience, even if it's, you
know, it's not a good experienceoverall.
(14:04):
Right, if you have to findyourself in a courtroom.
But if someone is treated towhat you said before, treated
with humanity and felt like theyare heard and have their
questions answered.
You know that's going to,that's going to resonate
throughout the community and somaybe that will happen with
someone.
They will have, you know, avalidating experience and then
if something like this happensto a friend or a loved one,
(14:27):
they'll say you know what?
It's okay to go and talk to thepolice, it's okay to talk to
the prosecutors.
So I think that I think you maysee more cases brought, because
one of the I would say theoverall kind of message behind
this framework is this frameworktalks about meritorious or
potentially meritoriousallegations.
So for sure, there are going tobe cases we can't bring right.
(14:48):
This doesn't suggest thateveryone is always telling the
truth, but what it does is sayto everyone you know, look at
the facts, look at the law,think about what a properly
instructed jury would do, notwhat an imagined jury would do.
And then, and you know, thesecases are provable and here's
how you prove them.
So, bring the cases.
If the victim is on board, youknow, if the law and the facts
(15:10):
support it, bring the cases.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Yeah, I had kind of wondered when I was reading
through this if it wouldencourage more people to report
and, you know, participate incases like this.
And when you first startedtalking about the five
principles, you emphasized themeeting, and the meeting with
prosecutor and the victim isespecially valuable.
(15:35):
I always kind of assumed theywere meeting, Is that not true?
Speaker 3 (15:40):
You know, I think sometimes prosecutors don't meet
victims until sometimes mayberight before trial or late in
the game or don't spend a lot oftime.
I think that happens probablymore often with misdemeanor
domestic violence cases wherethe volume is so great.
But yeah, I mean it shouldhappen.
But I unfortunately have heardpeople who say you know victims
(16:01):
who've never met with theirprosecutors and I think on the
whole people probably do.
But I think this emphasizesmeeting with your victims as
early as possible ininvestigation and having a
meaningful meeting right, morethan just in the hallway or, you
know, right before you go totrial.
I mean, you know, when you're avery young prosecutor and you
(16:22):
have lots of misdemeanor cases,even though they're serious
domestic cases, because of thevolume, sometimes that hallway
meeting is there.
You know that's not ideal, it'sunfortunate because of the
volume, but I'm.
But in general, I mean I camefrom and this is going back my
early part of my career.
You know, 20 years ago I camefrom the Broward County State
Attorney's Office in FortLauderdale where we had huge
(16:42):
caseloads.
You know I had 90 sex crimes atany given moment, but I met with
every single one of my victimsand it's a lot of work, but you
do the work up front and it paysdividends, because I mean to
your question about why it's soimportant, I mean it helps you
evaluate your case.
First of all, do you have a case?
What statutes Prosecutors thinkabout elements of crimes and
what we can prove?
Because that's what we need toknow, what we can prove beyond
(17:05):
reasonable doubt.
Right, that's our obligation,but it also gives that we need
information from victims to filecertain pre-trial motions,
right, I won't get into theweeds of that, but that's how we
protect their privacy, how weprotect the case.
We need, you know, and we arethe ones who have to stand there
in a courtroom with them asthey sit from their perpetrator
talking about one, probably oneof the most heinous things
(17:27):
that's ever happened to them andit's stressful and it's scary
and it's traumatic.
And so they need to trust us,right, and that trust doesn't
happen overnight, and so if wecan meet with them early and
start laying that groundwork,that pays dividends in that
courtroom.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
Yeah, and speaking of that, you know victim integrity
and offender accountability aretwo of the prevailing and
guiding forces behind theframework.
What do you feel is the publicperception of how sexual assault
and domestic violence cases arehandled?
Speaker 3 (17:58):
You know, I don't know what the perception is in
terms of how they're handled,but I do think and maybe this is
in line with it, I think youknow that the public is
skeptical of bringing sexualassault and domestic violence
cases.
They're skeptical of victims,skeptical of bringing sexual
assault and domestic violencecases, skeptical of victims.
And in developing thisframework and even before, when
(18:19):
I was prosecuting civil rightscrimes, I was going all over the
country.
That's how it worked.
I was based in DC and I'd goover the country.
I prosecuted law enforcement,sexual misconduct all over the
country and you know I brought alot of cases.
But sometimes there washesitance to bring cases,
hesitance to investigate cases,and it wasn't necessarily about
the law or the facts, but it wasabout some fallacies in society
(18:40):
and I think that affects, youknow, all of us juries, right,
and so when I say fallacies andthis is in the guide you can see
kind of like woven in thingslike it's he said, she said, and
it can't be proven.
All we have is the victim'saccount, which we know is
evidence, right, victims lieabout rape and domestic violence
(19:01):
, like we hear that all the time, and so because of all that
society thinks we can't provethese cases.
You know, it kind of ittrickles down all over.
Those are the juries that weare in front of, and so I think
that's the perception right,that like we can't handle it, we
can't bring these cases becausewe can't prove them, because of
those fallacies about the law,about misperceptions, about
(19:22):
victim behavior and things ofthat nature.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I am curious about, like why the public perception
of victims is so negative anduntrusting when it comes to the
sexual assault cases.
Yeah, and.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
I don't know that this is so much opinion, right?
I think you can kind of read itin the guide, so I will just.
I would just say this you know,if you think about, you know if
a I mean most.
Let me start by saying this weknow that most victims of sexual
assault and domestic violenceare women.
Of course, anyone can be avictim of sexual assault or
domestic violence and I don'twant to take anything away from
that.
(19:56):
But let's think of a robberyvictim and let's say that the
robbery victim is a man who iswell-dressed, in a business suit
, who is out at happy hour and,you know, had a few drinks, and
he walks outside the bar andhe's robbed and his watch is
stolen and he goes to the policedepartment.
And he walks outside the barand he's robbed and his watch is
stolen and he goes to thepolice department and he makes a
report.
The police investigate.
I mean, that's it.
They investigate, right?
(20:17):
They're not saying yes, ithappened, no, it didn't, they
are investigating.
You know they're not saying,well, you wore that fancy suit
or what did you?
You know what'd you think wasgoing to happen when you, like,
were drinking?
Or well, are you sure youdidn't give him your watch,
right.
You didn't consent, right,right, I mean.
(20:40):
And if you think about it like,well, why?
Why is why?
Is the opposite true for sexassault and domestic violence
victims?
Right, like, what were youwearing?
What were you drinking?
Are you sure you didn't want todo it?
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Right when the victim is very clear.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
no, no, no I didn't want to do it and it's a.
It's a large part, and this isreally part of the framework.
It says it flat out.
I mean, this is a large partbecause those victims are
predominantly women, and this isall based in misogynistic
tropes.
And this the guide says it flatout.
Right, why are these casesunderreported, underinvestigated
, underprosecuted?
(21:06):
Because there is thisinclination to disbelieve.
And for sure, this guy does notsay automatically believe, you
know, but what it does say issuspend that disbelief,
investigate like you would anyother case.
That is what ensures ourobjectivity.
We want to be objective and so,instead of making these
assumptions, somebody must havebeen drinking, so therefore,
(21:28):
right, they must have consent orwhatever the assumption is like
.
Suspend disbelief and justinvestigate, be objective.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Yeah, we talk about this all the time, about how if
a stranger came up on the streetand punched me in the face, it
would be he would be arrested.
It would be a crime wascommitted.
He came up and just assaultedme.
Yes, if I'm in my own home andmy my own partner or spouse
(21:56):
punches me in the face, that's aprivate matter.
That is may or may not bedomestic violence.
I may or may not haveinstigated it and participated
in violence, and I probablywon't be believed that this was
a pattern of abuse.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
Yeah, and that probably won't be believed.
That is what makes it sodifficult and why people don't
want to report because theycan't.
They are worried that no one isgoing to believe them.
And if I could kind of justbring it, you know, kind of full
circle to your comment beforeabout like humanity, like that's
what we can do for thesevictims I'm not saying
automatically believe someonewhen they come in, but you know,
(22:34):
we can treat them like humansand when we do believe them we
can say and tell them we believethem forward for whatever
reason, sometimes a victim justbeing said, being told I believe
you is really all.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
They want that validation right that in fact
this did happen.
That is exactly what Dr JudithHerman said in her latest book
Truth and Repair that victimswant to be believed and they
want to be believed by thepeople who matter.
They want to be believed bytheir families.
They want to be believed by lawenforcement, prosecutors, the
general public.
(23:18):
They don't care as much aboutthe consequences to the
perpetrator, as it is thatpeople won't say that they're
lying and understand that thisreally happened.
Yeah, I think that depends, andthat's why the guide says over
and over again.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
talk to.
Yeah, I think that depends andthat's why the guide says over
and over again, talk to thevictim, right?
The best way to know what avictim wants is to ask them.
And I often say when I dotrainings if you do in fact
believe the victim, tell them.
I mean, it's a decision aprosecutor needs to make at any
given stage of a case.
Certainly when we are sittingat that table arguing in front
(23:52):
of a jury, the reason we'rethere is because we believe the
victim.
We can't vouch for that, wecan't make that argument, but
that's why we're there, becausewe have determined that the
victim is credible and we can goforward.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
So is it true that prosecutors typically do not
pursue cases that they feelstrongly they cannot win, and
how would the framework helpaddress that?
Speaker 3 (24:11):
So I wouldn't look at it in terms of what can we win.
I mean, the standard forbringing a case is if you have
evidence to sustain a conviction, right, can you use the facts
and the law to prove thedefendant guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.
And what the framework does isremind prosecutors that we are
talking about a properlyinstructed jury.
(24:32):
That means so in a trial, thejudge gives the jury
instructions.
They're instructed on the law.
It's a set of instructionswhich I often say to prosecutors
and investigators.
You should know thoseinstructions from the very
beginning of your investigationbecause you want to know how a
jury is going to look at theevidence.
So the idea is that we want tosay to prosecutors don't think
so much about what an imaginedjury is going to do.
(24:53):
Oh, a jury is going to look atthe evidence.
So the idea is that we want tosay to prosecutors don't think
so much about what an imaginedjury is going to do.
Oh, a jury is never going toconvict because the victim was
in custody.
I mean, I used to prosecute,like I said, law enforcement,
sexual misconduct.
All of my cases, all of myvictims, had baked in
credibility deficits.
They were in custody, jail andunder arrest on probation.
But the issue is like can weprove the case?
And so she started worryingabout I don't know if the jury
(25:15):
is going to believe her becauseshe was intoxicated Like what.
Can she not remember whathappened?
Versus just because she wasdrinking, right?
Or oh, she doesn't speakEnglish, well, or whatever you
name it.
Whatever reason, it is what thequestion needs to be is do you
have the evidence, do you havethe facts?
And and it is what the questionneeds to be is do you have the
evidence, do you have the facts?
And what is the law?
And, using the framework, theblueprint that we gave you,
(25:38):
these cases are in fact,provable, and I think we get
hung up a lot of times on thelack of physical evidence or the
lack of eyewitnesses.
These cases you're not going tohave dispositive physical
evidence, you're rarely going tohave eyewitnesses right, and so
you have to rely on thevictim's account.
You know, the line I often use,which dates back to when I was
(25:58):
a state prosecutor, is thesecrimes don't happen in front of
an audience, which is a line I'msure I stole from one of my
colleagues a million years ago.
So I I I bequeath it to anyoneelse who wants to use it.
But I mean, that's the reality.
So we have to show a jury whythey can believe that victim.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
So how do you maybe give us an example of how you
shift that mindset for the juryand for prosecutors to be able
to work with victims andunderstand the difference
between, let's say, cases theycan win, victims being hesitant,
victims being uncooperative andstuff like that?
Speaker 3 (26:33):
So nowhere in the guide or the framework is there
the word uncooperative, right?
We don't actually.
I don't actually talk aboutuncooperative victims, right,
because I think we can flakehesitance with lack of
cooperation.
I mean, it completely makessense why somebody would be
hesitant, maybe wouldn't want toparticipate on any given day,
(26:56):
right, because we all have busy,crazy lives and lots going on
and I, as a prosecutor,represent a really bad time in
that person's life and theydon't want to dredge it up.
And so I would say to anyprosecutor, any investigator
tomorrow's another day, right,trial is a long road, and so
that's why it is so important towork with victim specialists to
(27:17):
continue that relationship withvictims.
You know, to build that casearound a victim's account.
That's why that interview is soimportant and I encourage, if
you can and I often did this asa federal prosecutor working
with our investigators early onto interview victims, because we
as prosecutors know theelements that we need to meet.
Right, those are the parts of acrime where we have to prove to
a jury, and we know the kind ofinformation we need and even
(27:39):
the smallest details.
You know, and I would say this,not everyone's going to
remember every detail.
It's part of human nature andcertainly part of traumatic
memory.
But whatever details a victimgives, we can corroborate
details leading up to and afterright, and that buttresses
corroborates someone's account.
I mean, I'll just give you asmall example of what that might
look like.
(28:00):
I had a case several years agoinvolving a private prisoner
transport officer who sexuallyassaulted women all over the
country.
He would transport them onout-of-state warrants and take
circuitous routes and drive intosecular locations and sexually
assault them and it's a prettybrutal case.
He's convicted, he's in prisonfor life and I think those women
all feel safe and I think theyfeel vindicated.
But who is the witness to eachone of those crimes?
(28:22):
The victim right, no one else.
And they are all in custody anda lot of them are in custody on
low-level crimes.
They were in custody and hecapitalized on that right.
He told them no one wouldbelieve them.
But you know we had I mean thisis a longer story, I used to do
trainings on it but one exampleis that a victim told us that
when he drove into this secludedarea it was outside of Little
(28:43):
Rock, arkansas.
He stopped for about 45 minutes.
Well, we got his cell site dataright, his pings from his cell
phone around that time and itshowed that he didn't move for
about 45 minutes when he shouldhave been moving.
He should have been droppingher off at the next jail.
So does that 45 minute gapprove that he raped her?
No, but it certainlycorroborates her.
It lends credence to heraccount.
(29:04):
What was he doing when hestopped for 45 minutes?
So that's like one tiny example, and if you do that as much as
you can those tiny examples addup and paint a compelling
picture for a jury.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
So can the same type of framework or something
similar be applied to defenseattorneys and how they can work
with prosecutors to kind ofovercome obstacles of issues
with presenting evidence,victims being hesitant and so
forth?
Speaker 3 (29:30):
Defense attorneys have a job to do, right, they're
going, they, you know certainly.
Defense attorneys have a job todo, right, they're going, they,
you know certainly, in trial,their objective is to create,
you know, to argue that there'sreasonable doubt to get their
client acquitted.
Defense attorneys, therefore,are going to use a lot of what
we see as hallmarks of trauma totheir advantage.
So I don't think they're goingto work with us so much, right?
(29:50):
No-transcript.
(30:19):
You know, on cross-examination,if a victim sounds scattered or
, you know, has disclosed overtime and is therefore
inconsistent, you know, I don'tknow that I would say that that
is inconsistent, but that's theargument they're going to make
to a jury.
Is that, if this reallyhappened, why didn't she tell
the prosecutor everything rightaway, Right Like?
you know, you know why is it?
You know, if it really happened, why couldn't she give us the
(30:41):
events in order?
And so the defense attorney isgoing to use those, use trauma
Right To to argue reasonabledoubt to a jury.
To argue reasonable doubt to ajury.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
But then the trauma.
The science of trauma clearlyindicates that a person who
experiences a traumatic eventmay or may not remember the
details in the right order or atall or at any one point in time
.
They may remember things overtime.
So defense attorneys shouldreally read about this, because
we're on to like theirstrategies right.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Well, I'm sure they know that and I think that's why
you know your trials are nottrials.
There's very little, I mean,there's always like a moment
that you don't expect, butoverall we know it's going to
happen.
And so the traumatic memory Ithink all the things you just
(31:33):
said is a lot of times whyprosecutors will call experts at
trial to explain to the juryhow traumatic memory works.
Right, so that we can educatethe jury and tell them yeah, I
mean, this is why the victimsounds scattered or nonlinear.
That doesn't mean the defenseattorney won't argue that they
are scattered and nonlinearbecause they're lying.
I mean, this is not a mystery.
The defense to every domesticviolence and sexual assault,
(31:54):
particularly where theoffender's identity is known
right, because most of these weknow the offender the defense is
going to be the victim's line,for whatever reason or no reason
.
Speaker 1 (32:04):
And so that's who we have to work against, and we've
seen so many examples of thisrecently, especially with the
hashtag MeToo and the MeToomovement.
So, because the cases reallyexploded, I guess you know in in
they've increased so much, andthe framework talks about the
importance of using victimspecialists.
(32:24):
To your point, could youexplain the role of a victim
specialist and, for those outthere listening who are
interested in serving in anadvocacy capacity, how can one
become a victim specialist?
Speaker 3 (32:37):
Yeah, so we use the term victim specialist in the
framework.
That is the term that we use inthe federal government for
those victim advocates who workin prosecutor's offices with our
federal law enforcementpartners to help the victim
through the process.
In the Violence Against WomenAct the term that's used is
victim assistant, and thenthere's also victim advocates
(33:00):
within the community.
So it is important todistinguish between those victim
specialists that are inprosecutor and law enforcement
agencies versus those advocatesthat are in community-based
settings.
The significance is thepresence of privilege, meaning
that a victim specialist that Iwork with in a prosecutor's
office doesn't have privilegewith a victim, right?
(33:21):
So the things that they say isnot covered by any sort of
privilege, whereas incommunity-based advocates there
may be privilege.
Community-based advocates arethe ones who can provide
counseling, maybe more safetyplanning, and so when we talk
about victim specialists, I'mtalking about the people that I
work with in the prosecutor'soffice and they're so important
(33:44):
because I mean for multiplereasons.
First of all, they need me bymy like representative, my envoy
, if, if a victim is hesitant totalk to a prosecutor, you know,
talk about um in principle, inprinciple to meeting with the
victim, having cultural humilitysometimes look.
I am a firm believer thatthere's always a thread.
You could always find some wayto relate to someone.
(34:05):
But I knew, for example, like Isaid, I was traveling all over
the country handling these cases.
I am I know you can't tell thisfrom.
Maybe you can hear a little bitof my voice.
I grew up in New York.
I am an East Coast person.
I walk with crutches youwouldn't know that from seeing
me on Zoom or hearing me on thepodcast and if I show up in
tribal lands or in the middle ofOklahoma because I worked for
(34:28):
the Justice Department and I'mcoming in from DC.
So victim advocates, victimspecialists, can bridge that gap
.
I think we all can.
We can find commonality.
The other thing is that victimspecialists can refer victims to
(34:51):
services things like counseling, things like crime victims
compensation.
Help them with safety planning,because we want victims to be
stable.
Not only is it a human thing todo, but the more stable a
victim is, the better they'regoing to do when they have to
testify, because it's rough andthen just thinking about things
like testing at trial.
You know I am in there with thatvictim.
I will prepare them.
(35:11):
Until they feel prepared, Iwill go and show them the
courtroom and everything.
They may want to go see thecourt more than once and I'm
preparing for trial.
I can't or they may and rightlyso need someone to sit with
them before they testify.
Absolutely, we should havesomeone sitting with the victim
before, but I'm in the courtroomcalling the witness before when
they're done testifying.
They've just been through theringer, it's tough, so they need
(35:34):
someone who can sit with themafterward.
I can't because I have to callmy next witness.
So my victim specialist isthere.
I mean, they are indispensable.
It sounds funny, but some of myclosest friends are the victim
specialists I work with becausethey're so integral, because
they help bridge that gap.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
It takes a village and I don't I don't say that,
like you know, to be flip oranything, but it really does in
a lot of situations and it'sgoing to take more people than
just the prosecutor to get someof this done.
I mentioned that prisontransport case.
Speaker 3 (36:02):
When we tried that case, it was me and my colleague
were the prosecutors, but wehad seven victims testify from
all over the country and theyall had to fly into the
jurisdiction where we wereprosecuting it.
But they all needed someone.
We didn't really want to evenput them in taxi cabs in the
airport because they weresexually assaulted during
transports, right.
So you have to think about whoyou know.
(36:24):
Who's going to pick them upfrom the airport?
Who's going to sit with thembefore they testify?
We couldn't have them sittingtogether, so like we had to have
a lot of different people workwith them and just be there for
them while my colleague and Iwere in the courtroom.
So it took a village for sure.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
Yeah, yeah.
I mean and these are all thingsthat have evolved over time
having all of these services andlayers to support victims who
experienced domestic violenceand sexual assault this is not.
This is new.
Basically, a lot of theservices that you're talking
about.
How would judges benefit fromunderstanding the framework?
Speaker 3 (36:58):
So I think anyone can benefit from reading the
framework because, as I saidbefore, it was written to be
readable and encouraging andpractical.
It is 22 and a half pagesincluding the footnotes.
So I've heard from judges whohave read it who have found it
helpful.
You know, judges need to knowabout the dynamics of sexual
assault and domestic violence,like everyone else who works in
(37:20):
this space.
The framework helps inform themabout all of that.
Where does it come in?
If my victim needs a break intrial, the judge will better
understand why.
If I need a continuance becauseeven though a victim was
participating the whole time andis suddenly hesitant, the judge
may understand why there aregoing to be issues in jury
selection that we have toaddress and the judge may have a
(37:43):
better understanding.
I mean, I'll tell you this as Igot older and worked on these
cases more.
Perhaps it's because of me too,I don't know, but jurors
disclose more now than when Ifirst started their own
experiences of sexual assaultand domestic violence.
So judges understand thedynamics of it.
They'll be better equipped todeal with it.
So I think for sure just abetter understanding of these
(38:05):
kinds of crimes can help anyonein this space.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
Yeah, for sure You're right and you alluded to early
on the idea of vicarious trauma,of being in this work for so
long, and it can be reallyheightened for prosecutors.
What recommendations could youshare for those who may be
reluctant to continue or evenenter this field of work?
Speaker 3 (38:28):
So I am no expert on vicarious trauma by any means.
I mean I obviously I'm not inthe courtroom right now, but I'm
still working on this and Iteach it and I train and all of
that.
What I would say is, being aprosecutor, we have an immense
amount of power, but we can usethose.
I mean we can.
We should use our powercarefully and under and wield it
(38:50):
with the Constitution in mindand we can do a lot of good
because of it, both fordefendants and victims.
Right, because we are the oneswho make decisions as to whether
you know, like, if a stop isunconstitutional, we can
recognize that and we make surethat we adhere to due process
rights.
We provide everything indiscovery and so forth, and we
can also make a big differencein our community and in the
(39:12):
lives of our victims.
So I think being a prosecutoris one of the maybe the best
legal job you can possibly have.
It is the highest of highswhich outweigh when there is the
lowest of lows, because some ofthose days are pretty hard.
But I would say that you know,principle five talks about
sustaining a healthy workforceand a lot of that is on on our
(39:33):
leaders, on our supervisors.
But I really do hope that, yes,I want people to stay in this
work, but I really hope you knowI teach law students.
I really do hope that, yes, Iwant people to see in this work,
but I really hope you know Iteach law students.
I really hope that law studentsconsider this work.
I decided I wanted to be aprosecutor a sex crimes
prosecutor when I was asophomore in college, which is
pretty early, and I'm so happy Idid because it is the greatest.
I mean the idea that you canhelp someone and and be that, be
(39:55):
that conduit for humanity.
It's just the greatest thingever.
So I would just say to anyonelike, yes, it is rough, but
nothing worth doing is easy,right, and the rewards outweigh
the hardships 100%.
So this framework is supposedto.
I mean, I'm just going to sayit is written in the first
person.
It is written with 120 peopletelling you like this works and
(40:16):
we're all here for you, and soit is.
It kind of is a symbol of thiscommunity practice around the
country.
It is encouraging because wewant everyone to do well and so
we want you know people who gointo this work know that there
is support right, there issupport out there from those of
us who've been doing it all overthe place, and so I hope people
consider doing it, because itis really some of the most
rewarding work you could do.
Speaker 1 (40:37):
Thank you so much for talking with me today.
Oh no, of course it's mypleasure.
Thank you.
If you would like to read theframework and related
announcements, you can findthose on the DOJ website at
justicegov.
Thanks so much for listening.
Until next time, stay safe.
The 2025 Conference on CrimesAgainst Women will take place in
Dallas, Texas, May 19th throughthe 22nd at the Sheraton Dallas
(41:01):
.
Learn more and register atconferencecaworg, and follow us
on social media at national CCAW.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!