Lecture 19 JS130 Sex and Justice PDF

Preview

Summary

JS 130 Sex & Justice
Michael Vallerga
TuesThurs 3:00 - 4:15
...

Description

11/05/19 Perpetrator Tactic: Darvo Sarah Harsey Perpetrator Tactics ● Central question: how do perpetrators try to influence what people think? How do they try to control the narrative about themselves and their accusers Gaslighting ● Manipulation that compels victims to question their own judgment and sanity ● Gaslighting includes the use of denial and attacks on a victim’s perceptions ● Not commonly examined in psych research– more of a pop culture phenomenon Pedophile Tactics ● 5 defense patterns described in the US Department of Justice manual for law enforcement officers ○ Denial ■ “Is it wrong to give a child a hug?” ○ Minimization ■ It only happened once ○ Justification ■ I love children, I don’t molest them ○ Fabrication ■ Making up excuses for abusive behavior ○ Attack ■ Calling child, witnesses liars DARVO ● But not a lot of empirical research in psychology has focused on perpetrator manipulation tactics ○ In general, the majority of research tends to focus on victim and victim characteristics ● In 1997, trauma researcher Jennifer Freyd first introduced DARVO ○ Developed based on Freyd’s observations of child sex abusers ● Deny, Attack, Reverse, Victim, Offender ● Deny (or minimize) abuse ○ “It didn’t happen, but if it did, it wasn’t that bad” ● Attack the victim ○ “The victim is a liar, the victim is just trying to get attention” ● Reverse Victim and Offender roles ○ “I’m the real victim here, the victim is attacking me” ● Used by perpetrators when they are confronted or held accountable for their wrongdoing ○ Can also be used by people who side with perpetrators

● ●

Originally conceptualized to be used by perpetrators of child sexual abuse, but applies to perpetrators of many different types of abuses Functions to ○ Deflect blame and responsibility away from the perpetrator ■ Maintains power, enables further perpetration, evade punishment ○ Portray victim as somehow guilty or blameworthy ■ Silence the victims

Darvo research ● Study 1: DARVO prevalence and relationship with self-blame ○ Survey asking people about time they confronted a perpetrator over a wrongdoing ○ Participants responded to DARVO questionnaire ■ Did the person you confronted say something similar to these phrases: example ● That never happened ● It wasn’t as bad as you’re making it sound ● You should be apologizing to me ● You’re a liar ○ How many people in the study reported that the person they confronted used DARVO? ■ 71.7% reported that the person they confronted used denial, personal attacks and played the victim ■ Common to hear all three components together ■ Use of the three components together ○ Personal attacks and self-blame ○ Darvo and Gender ■ Participants heard DARVO from both men and women at equivalent rates ● Men and women equally likely to use DARVO ■ But women participants were more likely to have been exposed to Darvo during their confrontations ● People are more likely to use DARVO on women ● Study 2: Darvo & Perceptions of victims/perpetrators ○ Experimental vignette study ■ Vignettes = short written stories ■ 316 undergraduate participants (68% women; 69% caucasian); average age = 20.71 ○ Random assignment to one of four sets of vignettes describing an incident of heterosexual intimate partner violence ○ Perpetrator and victim rated on believability, responsibility for the incident and abusiveness

●

● ●

Dar Vignettes varied by victim/perp gender and whatever perpetrator used Darvo in a statement: ○ Condition 1: male perp, female victim; perp uses DARVO ○ Condition 2: female perp, male victim; perp uses DARVO ○ Condition 3: male perp, female victim; perp DOES NOT USE DARVO In general, women rated victims as more believable and as having less responsibility for the abuse and rated perpetrators as more abusive In the vignettes, male victims were rated as having more responsibility for the abuse, as less believable, more responsible and more abusive

DARVO: Why does it matter ● Perceived victim credibility has important legal implications ○ Police officers more likely to recommend charges when they perceive a victim to be more credible ■ Perceived victim credibility ● Perceived victim credibility has important implications for victims ○ Supportive responses can be important in victim's recovery ■ -unsupportive responses -> more PTSD symptoms ● DARVO = very unsupportive ● Victims who are not believed are less likely to use healthy coping styles ● The victim who revived DARVO responses are more likely to blame themselves, which may be related to silencing and non-disclosure 10/31/19 Sexual Assault and Sexual Violence Homework #4 1. How are prison staff complicit in Inmate-on-Inmate Sexual Assault? a. Prison staff dismiss complaints by survivors of inmate-on-inmate sexual assault b. Prison staff use the rape-based hierarchies to keep order 2. What is the “Bad Man Myth” and why is it misleading as to sexual assault in prisons? a. The Bad Man myth is that sexual assault in prison is mostly stronger (black) men physically overpowering weaker straight white men b. Most sexual assault in prison is coercive instead of involving physical assault c. Most sexual assault in prison happens to LGBTQ people, not straight people 3. What is “benign variation” and how does it relate to the PREA standards? a. Benign variation- the spectrum of different gender/sexual orientation expressions is harmless b. PREA recommends that these be respected and understood institutionally 4. What is a “shielding relationship” and how does it relate to issues of sexual consent between inmates? a. Shielding relationship - a relationship with a powerful inmate sought by a less-powerful inmate that wants protection from the dangers of prison b. This is a form of coercion and is not consensual

Rape and Sexual Assault ● Rape Laws replaced by modern Sexual Assault Laws ○ Only some places ● Rape- penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person without the consent of the victim ● Sexual Assault/Battery - Graded offenses ○ 1st Degree - same as “rape” ○ 2nd Degree - Offenses involve non-penetrative forms of sexual contact with another person without that person’s consent ● Legally crimes require two pieces; Actus Reus and Mens Rea ● Actus Reus (guilty act) - act itself that is illegal ● Sexual Assault requires ○ penetration /sexual contact ■ Most states do not require corroborating evidence ■ Often this evidence is impossible to collect ● May not exist ● May not be collectible when police contacted Actus Reus of Sexual Assault ● Without Consent ○ Most non-consent is demonstrated by: ■ Use of resistance against offender (some jurisdictions) ■ Simply saying ‘no’ (some jurisdictions) ● Might not be this in practice by juries ○ Issues: ■ Power isn't only physical ■ Expecting people to fight back ignores social/power contexts ■ Gendered expectations ● Men are expected to always fight back Mens Rea of Sexual Assault ● Mens Rea (guilty mind) - Intention to do the Act ○ Varies state-by-state ○ Not always required ■ General intent crimes - moral blameworthiness ■ Courts interpret differently: ● Specific intent/use of force/knowledge of lack of consent ○ Specific intent means intentionally violating consent ■ Knowingly acting without the consent ■ Purposefully using force or threat of force ○ The most state presently only-require negligence (should have known)

“EXCEPTIONAL CLEARANCE” ● Evidence requirements of Actus Reus and Mens Rea are difficult ○ Sexual assault cases often rely on victim testimony ■ Prosecutorial Discretion means DAs might not take to trial ● Exceptional Clearance - uniform crime reporting allows reporting a case as “cleared” without an arrest in some cases ○ Police don’t always follow standards ■ Especially #2 ○ Don’t have to disclose details to FBI ○ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAI5xp6xsrM ● Stereotypical, old views on sexual assault: ○ Stranger attacks ○ Use of force or threat ○ Survivor actively resists (causing physical injury) ● Some police categorize this as ‘real rape ● Walfield (2016) found these cases more likely cleared by arrest ○ The majority of sexual assault is not like this ● Intimate-partner case arrest on par w/ stranger attacks ○ Likely because of mandatory arrest policies ● ProPublica compiled UCR & city police data ○ Some cities have a huge exceptional clearance rate for sexual assaults ○ Others do not Rape Shield Laws ● Sexual Assault is hard to get a conviction for ○ Often only testimony is available to the prosecution ■ Belief in survivor testimony is what this hinges upon ○ People, including juries, believe in Rape Myths ■ Like ‘women who are promiscuous are asking for it’ ○ Defense historically put the survivor of sexual assault on trial ○ Rape Shield Laws - Rules of evidence that prohibit (or significantly limit) the introduction of evidence concerning the past sexual conduct of an alleged sexual assault victim Rape Shield Law Exceptions ● Most allow discussion of sexual history with the accused ● Also depending on the defense’s arguments ○ If argued the incidence was result of consent to act of prostitution ○ If there was “unsubstantiated” charge of sexual assault in the past ■ Recently in Iowa boarding school case ○ Many states let judges allow sexual history evidence if they deem it “relevant” Rape Shield Laws and Social Media

●

●

Social media is ubiquitous ○ Courts have issues with social media evidence ■ Hard to verify ○ Some argue that social media is public ■ Therefore deserve to be presented Survivors (especially younger) likely to have posted to social media ○ Sexual cases can influence juries ○ Recent cases admitted social media to challenge survivor testimony ■ Prove that survivor isn’t ‘pure’ through past sexual experiences ○...