2015 - SEX CRIMES ACADEMY

Forensic Solutions, LLC and the International Association of Forensic Criminologists are pleased to sponsor this three day training event, April 27-29, 2015. It is a basic sex crimes academy for those working in the criminal justice system as investigators or legal professionals (e.g., mandated reporters, attorneys, nurses, and mental health professionals). 

Course Text: Rape Investigation Handbook, 2nd Ed. by Savino and Turvey.

Note: The book for this course is, Rape Investigation Handbook, 2nd Edition, by Savino and Turvey. Registrants will need to purchase their own copy, available at the door ($60.00 USD), or online at Amazon.com.

Registration details below.

---

DAILY SCHEDULE

DAY 1
Topic: Introduction 

• Human Sexuality and Sexual Deviance
• Sex Crimes
• Rape and sexual assault - legal constructs

Topic: The Investigative Response

• The First Investigative Response
• The Crime Scene
• Biological Evidence and the Medicolegal Exam
• Interviewing Suspects and Victims

DAY2
Topic: The Victim

• Forensic Victimology
• Eyewitness ID and Testimony
• False Allegations of Sexual Assault

Topic: Physical Evidence

• DNA for Detectives
• Reconstructing the crime

DAY3
Topic: The Offender

• Rapist Motivations
• Rapist Modus Operandi and Signature
• Investigating Serial Rape
• Sex Crimes on Trial

This course is open to the public, however it is intended primarily for front-line criminal justice professionals including:

Patrol officers Criminal investigators Sex crimes investigators Forensic Nurses Criminal Attorneys

---

LOCATION

Education Service Center - Region 19
6611 Boeing Dr. 
El Paso, Texas 79925

SEMINAR DATES/ TIMES
April 27-29, 2015
8:00AM - 4:30PM Daily

CONTACT
Brent Turvey, PhD
Email: bturvey@forensic-science.com
Phone: 907-738-5121

---

INSTRUCTORS

Lic. Manuel Esparza
fmr. Prosecutor

Lic. Manuel Esparza 
Forensic Solutions, LLC
Manuel Esparza was a Prosecutor and Investigator at the Chihuahua Attorney General's Office from November 1992 to November 2004. He also headed the Organized Crime Homicide and Women's Homicide Investigation Units between 1998 and 2004 in Juarez, Mexico.

He was assigned to Special Investigations by the Attorney General, focusing on Sexual Homicide, Domestic Homicide, Multiple Homicide, Serial Rape and Homicide where case linkage and crime analysis was required. He also handled Missing Persons Cases and headed the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program Initiative.

He worked as a private defense attorney from 2006 to 2010, both in the Inquisitorial and Adversarial Judicial System, handling cases in State Federal Court, and Juvenile Court, as well as the appeals and Habeas Corpus process when required.

He is a Diplomate of the Academy of Behavioral Profiling, and is currently a Junior Partner in Forensic Solutions, LLC involved in research, instruction and casework.

---

Brent Turvey, PhD
Forensic Scientist

Brent E. Turvey, Ph.D.
Forensic Scientist/ Criminal Profiler 
Brent Turvey holds a Bachelor of Science in Psychology, with an emphasis on Forensic Psychology, and an additional Bachelor of Science in History. He went on to receive his Masters of Science in Forensic Science after studying at the University of New Haven, in West Haven, Connecticut. He also holds a Ph.D. in Criminology from Bond University.

Since graduating in 1996, Brent has consulted with many government agencies, law enforcement agencies, and private attorneys in the United States, Australia, China, Canada, Barbados, Korea and Scotland on a range of rapes, homicides, and serial/ multiple rape/ death cases, as a forensic scientist and criminal profiler. This includes cases under investigation, as well as those going to trial. He has also been court qualified as a forensic expert in the areas of criminal profiling, forensic science, victimology, and crime reconstruction, providing expert examinations and courtroom testimony in legal jurisdictions throughout the United states since 1996.

He is the author of Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis, 4th Ed. (2011); and co-author of  Rape Investigation Handbook, 2nd Ed. (2011); Crime Reconstruction, 2nd Ed. (2011); Forensic Victimology, 2nd Ed. (2013); and Ethical Justice (2013) - all with Elsevier Science.

Brent is currently a full partner, Forensic Scientist, Criminal Profiler, and Instructor with Forensic Solutions, LLC (http://www.forensic-science.com), as well as an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Sociology and Justice Studies at Oklahoma City University. He is a Diplomate of the Academy of Behavioral Profiling, and serves on the board of directors for the International Association of Forensic Criminologists.

---

Paul J. Ciolino
Private Investigator

Paul J. Ciolino, Investigator
Paul J. Ciolino and Associates, Inc.

Paul J. Ciolino is an internationally known investigator who has specialized in catastrophic civil and high profile murder investigations for over thirty years. He has appeared on network and cable television stations as commentator, analyst, panel member, and expert on sex and murder cases on over one hundred occasions. He is also a paid investigative consultant for CBS News.

Mr. Ciolino is the author of In The Company of Giants: The Ultimate Investigation Guide For Legal Professionals, Journalists and The Wrongly Convicted. He is also a co-author of the best selling and critically acclaimed textbook Advanced Forensic Civil Investigations,  published by Lawyers and Judges Publishing Company. And he is the co-author of Advanced Forensic Criminal Defense Investigations.

Mr. Ciolino is a Diplomate of the Academy of Behavioral Profiling.

---

REGISTRATION

Those interested in registering for this workshop may pay by check, money order, or Visa/ MC. ECC students can enroll for course credit. 

Visa/ MC
Click on the appropriate link below.

1. Law Enforcement/ Government
    Individual rate:                                 $50.00= Click here.

2. Law Enforcement/ Government 
    Group rate*:                                      $65.00 = Click here.

3. Student rate**:                                 $50.00 = Click here.

4. Non-Student/ Public:                      $100.00 = Click here.

*Group rate = 3 or more registrants from the same organization.
**Must be enrolled in an accredited college or university; student ID required.

Check or Money Order
Make all checks or international money orders payable to Forensic Solutions, LLC in US Dollars. Also, provide your name, employment/ student information, and contact information including phone and email so that we can contact you and send updates.

Mail to:
Forensic Solutions, LLC
P.O. Box 2175
Sitka, Alaska 99835 
Re: Sex Crimes Academy

THE ROLE OF FORENSIC VICTIMOLOGY

Except from Turvey, B. (2013) Forensic Victimology: Examining Violent Crime Victims in Investigative and Legal Contexts, 2nd ed., San Diego: Elsevier Science.

In cases where victim actions, history, or demeanor are relevant to legal proceedings, forensic examiners may be asked to examine victim-oriented behavioral evidence and contextualize it before the trier of fact. This is the forensic aspect of forensic victimology [fn12]. ...the rules of admissibility vary from state to state, court to court, and judge to judge — as the admissibility of victimology evidence is made by the court on an individual basis and based on a sometimes-unique interpretation of the law.

[fn12] The single feature that distinguishes forensic examiners from all others in the field is the expectation that they may be asked to provide expert testimony regarding their findings in a court of law. If they conduct examinations and render findings without this expectation hanging over their work, it is not being done in a forensic context, and subsequent conclusions may not be prepared with the same standards of confidence or certainty. Worse, findings may be overly confident, without the required scientific restraint.

The question arises as to the role of victimology in this venue. In general, forensic examiners should conduct themselves as both scientist and educator. It is their role to provide a cooling effect to the often-heated issues surrounding victim-oriented behavioral evidence. They must examine the evidence impartially, through the lens of the scientific method, and render conclusions related to victimology in accordance with their findings. When necessary, they must be able to explain their findings to the court and show how they achieved them.

For the small percentage of cases that do go to trial, there is an unavoidable vulnerability to the culmination of errors, improper motivations, and the zeal of advocates on either side of the courtroom. This is particularly true of information related to the victim. As described in preceding chapters, victimological information can be compiled ineptly, reported inaccurately, or provided in a biased manner—and that is when it is collected at all. The misinformation that follows may combine during court proceedings to have a tremendous impact.

Bad information can create a snowball effect: errors and omissions in the original information provided to police lead to errors in the investigation; leading to problems in the case assembled against the accused; leading to mistakes in the charges handed down and how the case is brought by the prosecution; leading to false perceptions by the judge, jury, and media. All these can have influence over whether or not a defendant is convicted and how he or she is sentenced. Generally speaking, one purpose of forensic victimology is to help prevent this snowball effect from happening. 

Victimological information should be gathered objectively and consistently, and then used to describe or evaluate the victims and their circumstances so that judges and juries are privy to information that may be relevant to their decisions. In this context, direct questions must be asked: was the victim using drugs; does the victim have a history of falsely reporting crime; what was the extent of the victim’s physical injuries; was the victim conscious during the attack; does the victim have a history of taking rides from strangers or letting strangers into his or her home; does the victim lock his or her door at night? The judge, who determines what is legally admissible, decides the issue of relevance for these and similarly themed questions. Then, as already discussed, the judge makes a ruling: sometimes everything about a victim is admissible, sometimes nothing, and sometimes the court “splits the baby” by admitting a percentage of victim information.

The more accurate and complete the victim information provided, the clearer the context of the crime. This is an investigative axiom. During an investigation, everything about the victim must be learned and documented, with nothing treated as trivial. Unfortunately, there is a tendency on the part of some investigators to avoid gathering some or all of the victimology, to deprive the court of contextual information that might sway their findings against prevailing case theories. The court should view this practice with dismay, as informed decisions about what to admit and what to keep out cannot be made in the absence of a complete investigative effort and record.

Presenting victimological information in court involves a different standard from the investigative effort. Investigative victimology gathers everything; the court decides admissibility based on that record in the context of the collective issues in a case. Typically, victimological evidence must serve a particular purpose related to a legal issue to be admissible. For example, victimological information may demonstrate that a crime has actually occurred or that the elements of this case meet the definition of the charges brought against the accused. Information about the victim will undoubtedly contextualize the crime and help to reconstruct exactly what took place and in what order. 

Information about the victim may also allow the judge and jury to better understand who the victim is/was, why that person was targeted, how the victim was acquired and harmed, and most importantly by whom. On the other hand, if there is a specific reason to doubt the victim’s credibility or the accuracy of particular statements, victimology may be introduced at trial to bring this to light. 

These are just some of the many possible scenarios, but the theme remains clear: to be admissible in court, victimology must be relevant to a factual matter or legal question, and not simply part of a smear campaign.

Recent high profile cases involving victimological evidence include:

Jodi Arias

Jodi Arias was charged with first degree murder in the killing of her ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander. The killing took place at his home in Mesa, Arizona, in June 2008. Ms. Arias claimed she killed Mr. Alexander in self-defense. As part of her defense, she asserted that Mr. Alexander had become increasingly violent and more sexually demanding in the months before the confrontation that led to his death. She also claimed he was sexually interested in young boys. 

The prosecution, however, claimed that Ms. Arias killed him in a jealous rage, stabbing him at least 27 times. As part of her defense, explicit details regarding Ms. Arias’ sexual relationship with the victim were a constant feature of courtroom testimony.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK)

In late 2012, Dominique Strauss-Kahn reached a financial settlement with the hotel maid who claimed that he had sexually assaulted her. The former head of the IMF was accused of rape but then later the prosecution was dropped in 2011 when the victim was determined to be unreliable. She was not charged with making a false report, and sued him in civil court along with the New York Post.

Stacey Rambold

In 2013, District Court Judge G. Todd Baugh drew public ridicule after he sentenced former Billings teacher Stacey Rambold to a mere 30 days in jail for the 2007 rape of Cherice Moralez. A former Montana high school teacher, Rambold was convicted of raping the 14-year-old student. She later committed suicide.

Judge Baugh described Ms. Moralez as a troubled youth who seemed older than her years, explaining of Rambold's light sentence that she was "older than her chronological age" and "as much in control of the situation" as Rambold.

FORENSIC VICTIMOLOGY TEXT: VICTIM STUDY TOO POLITICAL; INVESTIGATIVE AND LEGAL OUTCOMES COMPROMISED

PRESS RELEASE - Forensic Solutions, LLC

Victims of violent crime are too often studied as stereotypical groups rather than as complex individuals. Investigators are too often pressured to accept or question victim statements based on emotional and political considerations. And worse, the justice system treats many victims as mere witnesses for the prosecution, rating their character with subjective moral standards, rather than perceiving them as real people who have suffered harm and need help. The result is less informed research, less informed investigations, and less informed legal outcomes. So argues the new textbook Forensic Victimology (Elsevier Science, 2009) coauthored by forensic scientist and criminal profiler Brent Turvey of Alaska, and Wayne Petherick, PhD, an Associate Professor of Criminology at Bond University on the Gold Coast, Australia.

In part, the current state of academic affairs has to do with the way that different victim groups are regarded by the police and courts, and then researched and taught by theoretical criminologists. There is a tendency to avoid asking tough questions of culturally sympathetic victims, such as those who have been raped, and a desire to punish others who may be regarded as immoral or complicit, such as drug addicts and prostitutes, Dr. Petherick explains.

“Victimology, which is a sub-discipline of criminology, is meant to be the scientific study of victims. But it is taught at university almost exclusively through a narrow lens that involves feminist and restorative perspectives bundled with less than reliable victim crime data,” states Dr. Petherick. “Unfortunately, too many lecturers are there to push a particular agenda or ideology when neutrality is what’s needed. That tends to put a lot of our best students off. It’s at best naive and at worst politicized. This needs to change.”

Turvey agrees. “Science is skeptical. It asks questions. And it assumes nothing. Lose the freedom to doubt and we lose our ability to understand problems, let alone solve them,” he explains.

Turvey, a court qualified forensic expert who has worked rape and homicide cases for law enforcement and attorneys since the mid 1990s, sees the current landscape of victimology as one overpopulated with advocates – some by job title and some by way of personal philosophy. “It seems as though much of victimology has become the property of those with social and even political agendas. There is more to victimology than that – substantially more.”

For Turvey and those like him, victim study is not about broad or obscure theory; it is applied and specific – a necessary component of investigating violent crime. “My job is to figure out what happened and why. That means getting the facts. And that means asking tough questions to victims and about victims in every case – no matter what. My experience has been that politics and personal beliefs immediately get in the way of that.”

For more than ten years, Petherick and Turvey have collaborated on casework and teaching projects in both the United States and Australia. In their work, they have repeatedly been confronted by the same types of problems with respect to victims of crime: some witnesses lie about victims, some victims lie about what happened to them, and some people lie about being victims. And that’s when victim evidence is collected at all. In the current culture, the way that victims are investigated and studied, it is difficult to address this without offending someone – whether it be the victim, a victim’s advocate, an investigator, an attorney, or a judge.

They came to realize that the solution to these problems was already there, if buried beneath competing agendas. The solution was to reboot victimology as a truly scientific study with investigative and forensic implications.

Forensic Victimology as a field is defined by the authors as the scientific study of victims for the purposes of addressing investigative and forensic issues. It involves the skeptical investigation of facts and a thorough examination of the evidence. Forensic victimology, explains Turvey, provides a scientific balance against the idealization or demonization of victims, a filter for deception and false reporting, and the means for identifying a threshold of relevance for victim information and opinions already at work in the criminal justice system.

They write: “the forensic victimologist is best conceived as an objective, dispassionate, and above all scientific examiner. They are critical and skeptical, and they put the establishment of fact before politics or any other consideration. To that end, they take nothing for granted, look for corroboration of any alleged victim’s statements, seek out collateral sources of information, and investigate alternate or contributing motives for victim behavior. Most importantly, the forensic victimologist is barred from assuming that alleged victims must have been victimized. For their purposes, victimity must be established unequivocally and may not be asserted simply for ideological purposes. They investigate as scientists, they report as educators, and they understand the gravity of their eventual courtroom testimony.”

The result of their work and research is a colloborative textbook, Forensic Victimology, published in October of 2008 by Elsevier Science out of San Diego, California, with chapters contributed by a range of professionals whose work involves interpreting victim evidence. “It gives students basic methodology, and professional victimologists the permission to think, teach, and act like scientists,” explains Turvey. Dr. Petherick goes further, arguing “It moves victimology from the theoretical study of victim groups through the lens of radical agendas to an applied scientific discipline that helps solve crime and resolve legal questions. It is where criminology needs to be.”

__________________________________________________________

Brent E.Turvey, MS, also author of Criminal Profiling, 3rd Ed. with Elsevier Science (2008), can be reached at bturvey@forensic-science.com.

Wayne A. Petherick, PhD, also author of Serial Crime with Elsevier Science (2005), can be reached at wpetheri@staff.bond.edu.au.