Environmental Scan

Commissioned by The Ministry of Women’s Affairs

Authors: Elaine Mossman, Lesley MacGibbon, Venezia Kingi, and Jan Jordan

For a PDF, click HERE

 

Return to Responding to sexual violence research reports page for more information on the research project and reports.

 

This document is made up of six parts.

Current

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

 

Contents

List of tables
List of figures
Acknowledgements
Executive Summary

Part one: Introduction

1    Background
1.1    Project overview
1.2    Rationale for the environmental scan
1.3    Aim of the environmental scan
1.4    Structure of the report

2    Methodology
2.1    Research objectives
2.2    Survey instruments
2.3    Ethical issues
2.4    Samples
2.5    Recruitment strategies and response rates
2.6    Methodology for Māori
2.7    Data analysis
2.8    Limitations of the research

Part two: Survey respondents – roles and characteristics 

3    Community service provider survey respondents
3.1    Types of community service provider
3.2    Specialisation in relation to groups of victim/survivors
3.3    Geographical location of survey respondents
3.4    Summary

4    Criminal justice survey respondents
4.1    Police
4.2    Doctors for Sexual Abuse Care regional liaison doctors
4.3    Crown prosecutors
4.4    Court victim advisers
4.5    Summary

Part three: Environmental scan of community service provision 

5    Characteristics of community services
5.1    Victim/survivors’ service needs
5.2    Types of services provided
5.3    Access to services
5.4    Survey respondents’ views on how service delivery could be improved
5.5    Summary

6    Views on community capacity
6.1    Perceived gaps in service provision for victim/survivors
6.2    Meeting emotional and medical needs
6.3    What works – effective interventions
6.4    Summary

Part four: Environmental scan of criminal justice system processes 

7    Phases of the criminal justice system
7.1    Initial reporting of sexual violation
7.2    Police processing of report (initial call for service)
7.3    Forensic medical examination
7.4    Formal interview
7.5    Decision to prosecute (lay charges against the defendant)
7.6    Court hearings
7.7    Summary

Part five: Criminal justice system and attrition 

8    Criminal justice system and attrition
8.1    Survey respondents’ views of the criminal justice system
8.2    Attrition points
8.3    Factors contributing to low rates of conviction
8.4    Survey respondents’ suggestions for change
8.5    Summary

Part six: Key findings 

9    Key findings
9.1    Victim/survivors’ access to services
9.2    Capacity of victim/survivor services
9.3    ‘What works’ to promote recovery and resilience
9.4    Criminal justice system – access and attrition
9.5    Concluding comment

Glossary of Māori terms
References 

Endnotes

---

List of tables

Table 1: Response rate across different surveys or respondents
Table 2: Survey sample characteristics
Table 3: Categories of service provider that responded to the survey
Table 4: Specialisation in services for a particular client group
Table 5: Regional breakdown of service providers
Table 6: Location of service providers (rural, provincial, urban)
Table 7: Proportion of regional liaison doctors’ time spent on therapeutic and forensic services, by service type
Table 8: Frequency of information requests by (n=166)
Table 9: Identifying additional needs
Table 10: Types of services provided (n=167)
Table 11: Most common methods of referral to service provider (n=166)
Table 12: Survey respondents’ views on how they can be assisted to provide better services
Table 13: Types of service providers perceived as being good at inter-agency collaboration
Table 14: Proportion of respondents viewing the range or level of service provision to be inadequate
Table 15: Service providers’ views on factors affecting victim/survivors having their needs met
Table 16: Recommendation to a close friend or family member whether to report to police or go through the criminal justice system
Table 17: Proportion of respondents with concerns about the criminal justice system’s ability to respond to or deal with diverse groups of victim/survivors

List of figures

Figure 1: Police districts (12) used for regional analysis
Figure 2: Involvement of different groups in the phases of the criminal justice system
Figure 3: Survey participation of CIB detectives, number by police district
Figure 4: Ability to disclose to a formal agency – gaps in services by region
Figure 5: Emotional support needs – gaps in services by region
Figure 6: Medical (non-forensic) needs – gaps in services by region
Figure 7: Reports of poor or no service delivery for specific groups of victim/survivors
Figure 8: Frequency of attrition during police processing (police estimates)
Figure 9: Mean ratings of how well aspects of the criminal justice system are delivered to victim/survivors

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the help and support we have received from members of our research team: Dr Tess Moeke-Maxwell, who provided Māori expertise and support throughout the project; Associate Professor Peggy Fairbairn-Dunlop, who provided quality assurance and advice from a Pacific perspective; and our two research assistants, Lana Moriarty and Lynzi Armstrong.

We would also like to acknowledge and thank the Ministry of Women’s Affairs staff with whom we had a working relationship over the life of the project: Dr Denise Lievore, Research Manager; Nicole Benkert, Research Co-ordinator; and Lynda Byrne, Senior Policy Analyst. All provided valuable guidance, support and feedback on methodology and various drafts of the report.

Feedback on research instruments and draft reports was also provided by the members of the project advisory group and this was greatly appreciated. This group was made up of representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the New Zealand Police, the Secretariat of the Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence, the Accident Compensation Corporation, Te Puni Kōkiri, the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs, the Ministry of Social Development, Te Ohaakii a Hine – National Network Ending Sexual Violence Together (TOAH-NNEST) and the National Collective of Rape Crisis. In particular our thanks go to Paulette Benton-Greig and Sandz Peipi from TOAH-NNEST who provided support, information and guidance to the researchers. We would also like to acknowledge the advice and support provided by the members of the project steering group.

We also greatly appreciated feedback provided by several other individuals who generously gave their time to review early versions of the survey instruments: Hayley Samuel, National Manager of Doctors of Sexual Assault Care; Grant Burston, Wellington Crown Solicitor; Mike Arnerich and Neil Holden, New Zealand Police; Margaret McGregor, Regional Victim Adviser Co-ordinator; and Tae Tu-inukuafe, Ministry of Justice. We are also very grateful to the individuals and services that assisted us with the distribution of surveys.

We would like to acknowledge and thank Liz Olle for her valuable and insightful feedback on the report in its final stages.

Finally, we would like to extend a very special thank you to all those who completed a survey, an extra demand during busy and often pressured working days. They have provided valuable information and insights on those agencies that are tasked with the critically important work of responding to adult victim/survivors of sexual violence.

Back to top

Executive Summary

Part one: Introduction

Researchers from the Crime and Justice Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, were contracted by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs to undertake four work streams relating to effective interventions for adult victim/survivors of sexual violence.  This report presents the findings of an environmental scan of agencies and key informants that respond to victim/survivors of sexual violence.

The objectives of the environmental scan were to identify key informants’ views on:

• factors influencing victim/survivors’ access to the criminal justice system and non-criminal justice services
• victim services’ capacity to meet victim/survivors’ needs, including gaps in services
• victim services’ views on what works to promote recovery and resilience
• the impact of location on victim/survivors’ ability to disclose sexual violence, particularly in respect of the level of services available locally, and have their needs met

• police and prosecutors’ views on attrition of recorded sexual violation offences and the effect of systemic, organisational and other contextual factors on investigating and prosecuting sexual violation offences.

 

The key informants for this environmental scan are the individuals and agencies that respond to adult victim/survivors of sexual violence.

• Community service providers: specialist sexual violence agencies, women’s refuges, Victim Support offices, mental health counselling services, medical service providers, and other community agencies. These service providers respond to the needs of victim/survivors who do not access criminal justice services, as well as those who report their assault to police.

• Criminal justice groups: police, sexual assault doctors who perform forensic medical examinations, court victim advisers and Crown prosecutors.

 

Survey instruments were developed in consultation with the Ministry of Women’s Affairs and reviewed by the project advisory group. The nature of contact between the different key informants and victim/survivors varied greatly, requiring five individually tailored surveys to be developed for the community service providers, sexual assault doctors, police, court victim advisers and Crown prosecutors. A range of different recruitment methods were used to invite the different groups of key informants to participate. Over 1,300 surveys were sent out, and 458 completed surveys were returned. Response rates for different groups ranged from 10 percent for Māori providers to 78 percent for specialist sexual violence services. The low response rate from Māori providers means their view has not been comprehensively represented in this report. Comments from some Māori providers suggested a kaupapa Māori research methodology (i.e. a methodology underpinned by Māori philosophies and practices) would have been more appropriate.

It is important to note that this report is not a stocktake of services, because the characteristics of those who did not respond to the survey are unknown.

 Back to top

Part two: Survey respondents – roles and characteristics

Descriptive information on survey respondents provides important details about the research sample and is a useful summary of the main groups in New Zealand who respond to victim/survivors of sexual violence.

Community-based service providers
A good coverage of community-based services was achieved from 12 regions across New Zealand. The majority of service providers who participated in the survey came from a major urban centre or provincial town (82 percent); only 8 percent indicated they were located in a rural area, although a further 9 percent reported that their service covered a range of locations, including rural areas. Service providers who participated in the survey were grouped into the following six categories. The number of respondents in each group appears in brackets.

• Specialist sexual violence agencies (SSVA) (n=27) are the primary group that provides specialist support and services to victim/survivors of sexual violence, typically including 24-hour crisis support. They are the only type of service provider that specialises solely on victim/survivors. Providers within this group include Rape Crisis centres, HELP Foundation centres, and other independent sexual violence and/or sexual abuse centres.
• Women’s refuges (n=11) provide specialist 24-hour support, advocacy and accommodation for women and their children who are experiencing domestic violence. A significant proportion of these women have also been sexually victimised by their partner or husband. Women’s refuges play an important role in supporting these women, many of whom do not report their sexual violence to other formal agencies.
• Victim Support (n=42) is a nationwide organisation staffed by volunteers that offer support to all victims of crime, including victim/survivors of sexual violence. While Victim Support accepts self-referrals, most victim/survivors they support are those who have reported the violence to police.
• Mental health counselling services (n=66) are the individual counsellors or service providers that provide counselling and emotional support services to victim/survivors. This includes Accident Compensation Corporation registered counsellors who provide government-subsided counselling to victims of sexual abuse (including sexual violation).
• Medical providers (n=15) are family planning agencies, sexual health clinics and university health centres. These service providers respond to victim/survivors who are seeking medical treatment after a sexual violation.¹
• Other community agencies (n=18) are  Māori community social service agencies, women’s health centres, sex-worker organisations, and stopping violence organisations.

 

There was considerable variation across the different groups of survey respondents in the level of specialisation, the volumes of victim/survivors of sexual violence seen, and the types of services offered. These differences are likely to affect service providers’ views and understanding of the needs of the victim/survivors with whom they work.

Criminal justice survey respondents
The following key members of the criminal justice system participated in the environmental scan. Their main roles and responsibilities within the criminal justice system are highlighted.

• Police (n=206). Their responsibilities include processing initial reports of sexual violation, investigating complaints, and deciding whether it is appropriate to prosecute the offender by laying charges in court. They are then involved in ongoing liaison with the victim/complainant² and Crown prosecution as the case progresses through the court system.
• Doctors for Sexual Assault Care (DSAC) regional liaison doctors (RLDs) (n=10). In cases of recent sexual violation, forensic evidence can be an important element of an investigation. Ideally, this is collected as soon as possible after the assault by a specialist sexual assault doctor. The doctors who conduct the medical examination can be called on to interpret the evidence and act as expert witnesses at trial. DSAC RLDs participated in this research. They co-ordinate a roster of doctors (including themselves) who can conduct these examinations. The forensic work of sexual assault doctors can overshadow their primary role, which is to provide therapeutic care (e.g. assessment and treatment of injuries, and pregnancy and sexual health checks).
• Crown prosecutors (n=46). Once a sexual violation charge has been laid in court and a judge has committed the case to trial, the case is taken on by Crown prosecutors. They review the file and lay the indictment. Crown prosecutors then present evidence against the accused at the jury trial, where they must prove against a set standard the case against the accused.
• Court victim advisers (n=17): This group are employed by the courts to support victims of crime through the court process. This support is available from the time charges are first laid against the defendant through to the completion of the court process. The services they provide include the provision of case information; facilitation of victim/survivors’ safety whilst in court; and liaison with police, prosecutors, the judiciary, and community organisations. They also inform the court of the victims’ views and ensure victims of crime are informed of their rights under the Victims’ Right Act 2002.

 

It is important to note that families/whānau and friends, together with the support agencies also play significant roles in supporting a victim/survivor through the criminal justice system.

 Back to top

Part three: Environmental scan of community service provision

 

Characteristics of community service providers
Summarised below is descriptive information about the community service providers that participated in the survey. This is based on self-reported information provided by representatives from agencies or individual service providers (i.e. counsellors) and looks at the characteristics of the clients they see, the services they provide, and their views on what could assist them to improve service delivery.

Victim/survivor service needs: The majority of clients seen by community service providers were seeking help for historical sexual violence (violence occurring over 12 months ago). Victim Support and women’s refuges were the only type of service providers where recent sexual violence cases were more frequent – half or more of their caseloads (82 percent and 70 percent, respectively).

The most frequent requests to service providers from victim/survivors were for information on counselling, followed by a related request on ‘how to feel better’. However, only those who recognised, and were able to name, their experience as ‘rape’, were likely to seek assistance. Information on court processes, reporting to the police, and victims’ rights were also frequently requested. Service providers identified that victim/survivors that came to them had high levels of complex needs. Of particular concern was the low number of support services available to assist victim/survivors with immigration, English language and accommodation issues.

Types of services provided: Agencies such as SSVAs provide a wide range of services, whereas other agencies have particular areas of focus (e.g. medical services or mental health counselling services).

• Sexual violence support services: SSVAs and women’s refuges were most likely to provide 24-hour crisis intervention, advocacy and support, and sexual violence education and prevention services.

• Health and medical services: Medical practitioners provided victim/survivors with crisis medical services, including assessment and treatment of injuries, and pregnancy, sexually transmitted infection and or other tests. SSVAs or
• ACC-registered counsellors were most likely to provide services related to long-term mental health such as counselling.
• Criminal justice related services: SSVAs, women’s refuges, and Victim Support were most likely to provide victim/survivors with support to report to the police.

 

Survey respondents identified limited service availability as a barrier to meeting the needs of victim/survivors and called for increased numbers of providers, including those providing specialist sexual violence services and doctors qualified to conduct forensic medical examinations. Respondents also saw the need for restorative justice services for victim/survivors of sexual violence.

Access to services: The most common method of referral to service providers was self-referral by the victim/survivor, except for Victim Support where most referrals came from the police. Māori have comparatively higher rates of referral from the victim/survivor’s family/whānau and friends. High levels of self-referral point to the importance of service providers and their respective services being well publicised.

Service providers perceived that they were better able to deliver services to some groups of victim/survivors than others, which suggests some groups of victim/survivors have better access to effective services than others. Service providers felt least able to deliver services well to the following client groups:

• ethnic, migrant, refugee clients (65 percent of service providers rated their service delivery as average or worse)
• Pacific peoples (49 percent of service providers rated their service delivery as average or worse)
• people with disabilities (47 percent of service providers rated their service delivery as average or worse).

 

Just under a third of service providers had concerns about their ability to deliver services to Māori (30 percent) and male victim/survivors (29 percent), and around a quarter in relation to victim/survivors who were sex-workers (24 percent).

Improvements in service delivery for certain groups of victim/survivors were suggested, including making ACC funding available for those now living in New Zealand but experienced an assault overseas (e.g. Pacific peoples, and ethnic minority, migrant and refugee groups). Services to these later groups were also felt to be limited by providers’ inadequate knowledge of relevant languages and cultures.

Survey respondents’ views on how they could improve service delivery:

• Increased funding was identified as one of the top two needs by four out of the seven types of service providers. SSVAs appeared to be the least well resourced with 96 percent of SSVAs calling for more funding to enable them to improve service delivery. The increased funding would be used to increase workforce capacity and improve facilities and equipment.
• Another major issue for SSVAs related to improved access to services. Over two-thirds of SSVAs indicated this as a way to provide better services, compared to around one-third or fewer respondents from other services. This reflected a concern over a relatively low level of awareness of SSVAs in the community and communities’ lack of awareness about the meaning of ‘rape’ and barriers associated with the stigma of ‘rape’.
• Māori service providers indicated that addressing workforce issues would improve their service delivery, with 10 out of 13 Māori providers needing more qualified and experienced staff and 8 needing more staff.
• Service providers recognised the importance of inter-agency collaboration for the effective delivery of services. While many service providers, particularly SSVAs, were considered to be collaborating well with other agencies, there is still room for improvement. Only around 30 percent of survey respondents had any formal agreements with other agencies for such collaborative work.
• Other ways to improve service delivery included improving the responsiveness of ACC services and systems, improving access to funding for practical support (i.e. childcare and transport) and ensuring adequate coverage of services to all regions.

 

Views on community capacity
The views of a wide range of survey respondents (community service providers and criminal justice groups) were sought on the capacity of their community to respond to the needs of victim/survivors. In contrast to the previous self-reports about the services agencies delivered, this section asked them to stand back and comment more broadly on the overall level of service provision in their community.

Survey respondents were asked whether the range or level of services in their area:

• enabled victim/survivors to disclose to a formal agency
• meet victim/survivors’ emotional support needs
• meet victim/survivors’ medical (non-forensic) needs.

 

Nationally, the greatest concern was an insufficient level of service provision to ensure victim/survivors could have their emotional support needs met. Community service providers appeared to have greater concerns over gaps in services than criminal justice groups. Particular concerns were the costs and delays in accessing ACC-funded counselling and the inadequacy of resources for SSVAs to provide these services efficiently.
Some areas appeared to be better resourced than others. Bay of Plenty was the region seen to be most lacking in services, and Canterbury was seen as one of the better resourced regions.

Service providers were also asked to rate the extent of service provision for specific groups of victim/survivors within their community. Half of service providers identified gaps in services for new migrants and refugees, and over a third identified gaps in services to Pacific peoples. Few services for sex-workers, people with disabilities and men were also noted. These findings very much mirrored concerns from the service providers about their ability to respond to these particular groups.

 

Service providers’ perceptions of barriers that prevent victim/survivors having their needs met:

• Shame and self-blame: Forty-four percent of service providers identified shame and self-blame as barriers to victim/survivors accessing services in order to have their emotional support needs met. Shame and self-blame were also seen to be a barrier to victim/survivors accessing medical services, although this was noted by a smaller proportion of respondents (15 percent).
• Lack of information about available services: Forty-one percent of service providers stated that a lack of information for victim/survivors about the availability of services limited their ability to access emotional support services, particularly those who were victim/survivors of historical sexual violence. Concerns were raised about the lack of information about ACC entitlements and how to access suitable counsellors. A lack of information was also seen as a barrier to victim/survivors accessing services to meet their medical needs (noted by 39 percent of respondents). Victim/survivors were often unaware of available services other than the hospital emergency department or their family doctor.
• Costs: Forty percent of service providers identified the cost of services as a factor preventing victim/survivors accessing services to have their emotional needs met. A slightly higher proportion noted this as a barrier to their accessing services to get their medical needs met (50 percent).
• A lack of services: Twenty-five percent of respondents saw the lack of services as a factor limiting victim/survivors access to emotional support services. Gaps in services for specific groups such as young people (16–25 years) and Pacific peoples were seen as being particularly problematic. The inadequacy of services in rural areas was also noted.
• Geographical isolation: This was identified as a problem in relation to victim/survivors accessing emotional support services (14 percent) and medical services (8 percent).

 

Service providers’ perceptions of factors that assist victim/survivors to have their needs met:

• The availability of good quality services was identified by 98 service providers (63 percent) as a key to ensuring victim/survivors can have their emotional support needs met. The key characteristics of good quality services included being immediately accessible, being affordable or free, offering a choice of services, and being widely advertised. Quality services were also seen as important in ensuring victim/survivors were able to have their medical needs met (40 percent). A quality medical service was identified as one with approachable, knowledgeable, non-judgemental doctors and nurses who were supportive of victim/survivors of sexual violence.

• Good inter-agency collaboration and referral systems were seen as crucial for services to be able to meet victim/survivors’ emotional support needs (n=60, 38 percent) and medical needs (n=50, 42 percent).
• Provision of practical support such as childcare and transport was noted by 6 percent of respondents as assisting victim/survivors to be able to access the services they require.
• Workforce issues: One-third of Māori services reported being able to provide services effectively to Māori victim/survivors. However, along with non-Māori services, their capacity to respond effectively is impeded by a lack of a highly skilled mental health workforce to provide specialist counselling services.

 

What works – effective interventions: Seventy-six percent of community service providers identified interventions or aspects of service delivery that, in their view, were working well in their community. Key themes were the need for competent and consistent support services, and the ability to meet the need of diverse groups.

• Effective counselling: The most frequently cited intervention that was seen to promote recovery and well-being in victim/survivors was effective counselling (65 percent, n=39). Initiatives that enhanced access to effective counselling included counsellor co-ordination across the region, counselling models that include whānau, group counselling, free counselling after ACC funding expires, and culturally matched counselling.
• Effective crisis support: The second most frequently cited effective intervention was effective crisis support (58 percent, n=35). Service providers that were perceived as providing effective crisis support included HELP centres, sexual abuse centres, rape crisis centres, Māori agencies, women’s refuges, women’s centres, and abuse prevention agencies. In one region, an online service for victim/survivors was seen to be showing promise.

 

Other effective interventions included providing follow-up support, effective interventions for specific groups, good inter-agency collaboration, police specialisation and good liaison, and rape prevention and education programmes. 

 

Part four: Environmental scan of criminal justice processes

 

Phases of the criminal justice system
The criminal justice system consists of the police and the network of courts and legal processes that deal with the enforcement of criminal laws, including the laws that prohibit sexual violation. Victim/survivors who enter this system can experience it in diverse ways: highly validating and supportive or inflicting secondary victimisation (Herman, 2005; Jordan, 2004). Survey respondents revealed a system both complex in nature and involving protracted processes that victim/survivors had to negotiate.

The key phases through which a victim/survivor might typically progress are:

• initial disclosure of sexual violation to police
• police processing of initial report (initial call for service)
• forensic medical examination
• formal interview by police
• decision to prosecute
• court hearings.

 

There were several points where seeking justice was seen to be re-traumatising for victim/survivors and many respondents raised concerns about the system’s ability to deliver justice for all victim/survivors. While the majority of respondents were supportive of victim/survivors reporting sexual violation to the police, fewer said they would advise a friend or family member to go through the criminal justice system (only 20 percent of DSAC RLDS, 38 percent of service providers, 39 percent of Crown prosecutors, and 59 percent of police).
Of particular note were the number of respondents who said their advice would depend on the individual circumstances of the case (e.g. if there was no corroborating evidence and the case relied on disproving consent, vulnerability of victim/survivor, or if they had been under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of the assault). Such replies suggested a clear recognition among respondents that some types of victim/survivors are less likely to receive justice.

 Back to top

Part five: Criminal justice system and attrition

 

In New Zealand and overseas, it is understood that there is a high rate of attrition of reported sexual violation offences (i.e. a high rate of reported cases that do not proceed from one phase of the criminal justice process to the next).

Survey respondents were able to identify factors that contributed to high rates of attrition, some related specifically to certain points in the process, while others could occur at various stages (e.g. victim/complainant withdrawal).

Non-reporting of sexual violation
The point of greatest attrition in sexual violation cases occurs before the criminal justice system because of non-reporting. It is estimated that only one in ten victim/survivors report their sexual violation to police. Community service providers identified the following factors as barriers to reporting.

• Shame and self-blame: Shame was identified as a particular factor inhibiting Māori, Pacific women and Asian women, and male victims from reporting.

 

Self-blame was also seen as a problem for victim/survivors when alcohol or other drugs were involved and for victim/survivors who were in a relationship with the abuser. In rural communities, police may be known to the victim/survivor, which can cause embarrassment, which was an issue identified in Māori rural communities.

• The fear of not being believed was seen as a barrier to not reporting for most victim/survivors, and was a particularly strong barrier for victim/survivors who were sex-workers, victim/survivors with mental health issues, victim/survivors who had made a previous sexual violation complaint, male victim/survivors, and women raped by their partners.

• Disbelief in criminal justice system: One-third of service providers stated that a major factor in victim/survivors not reporting to the police was their belief that they would not get justice through the criminal justice system. Historical poor relations between police and Māori were also seen to increase levels of distrust.

• Fear of the consequences, including fear of retribution or reprisal by the perpetrator, was a strong factor for victim/survivors who were in continuing relationships with offenders and associated with gangs. The fear of publicity or exposure also played a part in the decision whether to report to the police.

• Family or community pressures were identified as a particularly strong factor related to non-reporting by Māori and Pacific victim/survivors.

 

Attrition during police processing of complaint
Police survey respondents perceived victim/complainant withdrawal to be more common than a police decision to discontinue with a case at all points in the process except ‘during investigation’. During the investigation a decision by the police not to proceed was seen as more likely than the victim/complainant withdrawing.

Reasons for not proceeding to a full investigation: Police explained the main reasons why cases might not proceed following an initial call for service, focusing on why a victim/complaint would withdraw their complaint, including:

• fear of the legal process
• relationship with the defendant – they could be partners or acquaintances and victim/survivors might not want them to be convicted or go to jail, and some victim/survivors feared retribution
• initial third-party pressure on the victim/complainant to make the complaint, which the victim/survivor subsequently withdrew
• alcohol or other drug consumption – either the complainant decided after sobering up that they did not want to continue, or were concerned that the level of intoxication might have contributed to the situation
• reporting solely to inform police – some victim/complainants just want the police to know what happened (or want safety or medical assistance) but for various reasons do not want to make a complaint.

 

A case also might not continue if early indications were that the evidential threshold would not be met; for example:

• the evidence collected is contradictory (i.e. evidence of a false complaint)
• there is insufficient evidence because of the impaired memory of the victim/complainant as a result of the influence of alcohol or other drugs
• there is a lack of corroborating evidence
• the victim/complainant has misunderstood the law, and when it is clarified it is established that sexual violation did not occur.

 

Attrition during or following an investigation: Police descriptions of why cases do not proceed beyond the investigation phase to where charges are laid, also included that the evidential threshold had not been met (the most common scenario), closely followed by the victim/complainant deciding to withdraw. As the case progressed, a factor contributing to the victim/complainant’s decision to withdraw was the likely lengthy delays before the case would be heard. Other factors included the suspect not being identified, victim/complainants not being capable of giving evidence (because they have absconded, have died, cannot be located, or are mentally or emotionally unfit to withstand trial), concerns about victim credibility, and the poor prospects of getting a conviction.

Attrition during court proceedings
Where a police investigation has concluded there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution, police lay charges in court against the defendant.

Police and Crown prosecutors were asked to describe why attrition in sexual violation cases occurs during the court process.

Plea bargaining before depositions: Responses from police indicated that plea bargaining was not common with sexual violation charges. In the few cases where plea bargaining occurred it appeared it was more likely for sexual violation charges to be amended to lesser sexual offences, than it was for sexual violation charges to be not pursued at all. In such cases the decision to negotiate appeared to be the result of weighing up the likelihood of getting a conviction against what was in the best interests of the victim/complainant.

Attrition after depositions, before trial: Once a case has been committed to trial, Crown prosecutors review the case file, and then ‘lay an indictment’. It is possible this re-assessment can result in charges being re-formulated (i.e. either different or additional charges). It is also possible for the Crown to elect not to file an indictment. Neither were seen to be common occurrences, but electing not to file an indictment was seen as even less probable than the amendment of sexual violation charges. The most likely reason for an indictment not to be laid is when the Crown ‘offers no evidence’ because the victim/complainant wishes to withdraw the complaint. This would result in a section 347 discharge under the Crimes Act 1961, with the judge dismissing the case from court.

Other reasons for the case not proceeding could be that the defendant enters a guilty plea or, in rare cases, the defendant dies or disappears. It is also possible for the judge to dismiss the case over concerns for the welfare of the victim/complainant (e.g. after repeated suicide attempts).

Trial discontinued before a final verdict is reached: Once a case makes it to trial it may be discontinued before a verdict is reached by a jury (e.g. a ‘stay of proceedings’ or the judge can dismiss the case).

Examples of where a ‘stay’ might occur were predominantly cases where there had been lengthy delays in the case getting to trial or previous hung juries. Reasons given for a dismissal were similar to those applicable in earlier stages of the proceedings – the court process being seen as too traumatic for the victim/complainant, or the victim/complainant not wanting to give evidence, so the Crown offering no evidence.

Accused acquitted: The final point of possible attrition is where, based on the evidence presented, the jury fails to find the accused guilty ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ and there is an acquittal.

For a conviction to be handed down, the jury must decide beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the sexual violation. An over-riding theme that arose from respondents was that achieving the evidential threshold required to convince jurors beyond reasonable doubt was particularly problematic in cases of sexual violation.

Police and Crown prosecutors pointed to several factors associated with sexual violation cases that made meeting the criminal standard of proof particularly difficult. These factors included:

• the nature of the evidence, in particular the lack of corroborating evidence
• cross-examination tactics – the ability of the defence to discredit the victim/survivor as a reliable witness
• the rights of the accused – the inability of the prosecution to challenge an accused using their right to remain silent
• jury members’ lack of understanding about the nature of rape/sexual violation (and issues of consent).

 

A few suggestions were made about factors specific to certain groups of victim/survivors (e.g. Māori, Pacific, young people, or people with an intellectual disability): credibility issues, prejudices of juries against certain groups, and family and community pressures not to report or follow through (e.g. Māori, Pacific, and other ethnic, migrant, and refugee groups).

Survey respondents’ suggestions for change
Many of the criticisms made and concerns identified by respondents were not new, resulting in a confirmation of issues rather than new insights. While there was a recognition of changes that had been made (e.g. legislative reforms), it was clear most respondents were still waiting for more to be done. Their suggestions are summarised below.³

Change the way a complainant gives evidence: A number of suggestions for improvement centred on the way victim/complainants are required to give evidence, in particular, the cross-examination of their evidence by defence counsel. There were calls for:

• greater judicial control over the nature and content of cross-examination of victim/complainants
• the use of alternative provisions for giving evidence, including considering whether it would be appropriate for evidence-in-chief to be given via a video recording.

 

Change the availability and presentation of evidence by the accused/defence: Several suggestions related to increasing the availability of defence evidence, including:

• abolishing the accused’s right to silence
• increasing the admissibility of propensity evidence (i.e. evidence about similar convictions and previous similar behaviour)

• requiring the full disclosure of defence evidence
• placing the onus on the accused to prove that consent had been given.

 

Educate juries and the public on the nature of sexual violation/rape: Comments throughout this report made it clear that the dominant stereotype of ‘rape’ as an act committed by strangers is still pervasive. This greatly affects the ability of those whose sexual violation experience does not fit this stereotype to access justice. This was reflected in the number of survey respondents who said they would not necessarily recommend to a close friend or family member that they go through the criminal justice system. In response, there were suggestions that jurors should be educated on the nature of sexual violation, either by being given information before evidence is presented, through the use of expert witnesses, or more generally, through a public education campaign.

Consider alternative systems of criminal justice: Several suggestions were made around more fundamental changes to the criminal justice system, including:

• judge-only trials (either a single judge or panel of judges)
• whether an inquisitorial system of justice would be more appropriate
• different options for verdicts
• expediting trials
• restorative justice as an option in addition to existing criminal justice processes
• specialist courts.

 

Other suggestions: Suggestions were made about how to improve the experience of victim/complainants.

• More specialisation by police and other criminal justice professionals. Reports indicated responses from police were variable, some good and some not so good. Increasing the availability of detectives who have specialist training in adult sexual violation was one suggestion for improving consistency.
• Ongoing provision of information for victim/survivors, including the provision of written material so information can be accessed when victim/survivors are ready and able to take it in.

• Earlier and more involvement or contact with Crown prosecutors for victim/survivors (and other agencies).
• Improved environment and facilities for victim/survivors when reporting to police and during court hearings.
• More doctors qualified to conduct forensic medical examinations to reduce travel and delays for some victim/survivors, and increased resourcing for these doctors to reflect the time involved.

 

Concluding comment
The strength of this report is in the bringing together of information about all the agencies, services and systems with which victim/survivors may come into contact. The roles and responsibilities of the various groups have been described and an outline provided of many of the processes a victim/survivor must negotiate. Consequently, our understanding of the capacity of these groups to respond effectively to victim/survivors and the factors that affect their ability to do so have been enhanced.

Findings have revealed a range of community service providers, with varying levels of specialisation that offer a variety of services and support to victim/survivors throughout New Zealand. However, just because services exist, it does not mean victim/survivors can access them or that the services have the capacity to meet the all the needs of victim/survivors. Questions were raised about the adequacy of existing services in particular to meet the needs of victim/survivors in more remote rural areas and from diverse groups.

To improve service delivery it was clear service providers required increased funding in order to employ a sufficient number of experienced and qualified staff, and ensure services were delivered in appropriate facilities. There was also a pressing need to increase qualified, experienced staff to work with Māori victim/survivors. Societal misunderstanding of the nature of sexual violation/rape was also seen as a significant barrier to all victim/survivors being able to identify their experiences as sexual violation and to access appropriate support and justice.

Many of the concerns and criticisms identified in relation to the treatment of victim/survivors within criminal justice system were not new. While there was recognition of improvements in some areas (e.g. legislative reforms and increased specialisation and training within police), there was a strong sense that more needed to be done before victim/survivors could be guaranteed a fair and just system.

Key challenges are:

• deciding what needs to be done to ensure there is consistently good practice among all those who respond to victim/survivors
• gaining a better understanding of what is effective and fair practice to diverse groups of victim/survivors.

 

In relation to the criminal justice system a further challenge to making any changes will be achieving the right balance between the needs of victim/survivors and the evidential needs of a justice system that has been designed to determine the criminal liability of the accused.

The objectives and intended scope of this report were very broad. In attempting to present such a complete picture of all the agencies, services and systems that victim/survivors may come in contact with, there has been a trade-off in the inability to explore all the complexities of the information provided by survey respondents. Therefore, rather than providing all the definitive answers, this report should be seen as providing a starting point for identifying issues requiring more attention.

Glossary of Māori terms

This glossary explains te reo Māori used in the report (Ryan, 1995).

hapū	sub-tribe
hauora	healthy – in this context referring to a local māori health service
hui	meeting
iwi	people, tribe
kaumātua	elder
kaupapa	theme, topic
kaupapa Māori	underpinned by Māori philosophies and practices
mahi	work
mana	integrity, prestige
Māori	indigenous people of New Zealand
marae	Māori meeting place
Pākehā	non-Māori, European
rangatahi	youth
koro	elderly man
kuia	elderly woman
tuakana–teina	in the context of this report, meaning roughly ‘inter-generational’; relates to status dynamics within Māori society where a younger person needs to show respect for their elders
te reo Māori	Māori language
tikanga	custom, rule, principles
utu	revenge or retaliation
whakamā	embarrassment or loss of mana, shy
whakapapa	genealogy, family tree
whānau	extended family
whanaungatanga	relationship, kinship

 Back to top

References

• Campbell, R. (2006) ‘Rape survivors experiences with the legal and medical systems: do rape victim advocates make a difference?’. Violence against Women, 12(1): 30–45.
• Campbell, R., and Raja, S. (1999) ‘Secondary victimisation of rape victims: Insights from mental health professionals who treat survivors of violence’, Violence and Victims, 14(3): 261–275.
• Freckelton, I. (1998) ‘Sexual offence prosecutions: a barrister's perspective’, in P. Easteal (Ed.), Balancing the Scales: law reform and Australian culture. Leichhardt, Sydney: Federation Press.
• Herman, J. (2005) ‘Justice from the victim's perspective’, Violence against Women, 11(5): 571–602.
• Jordan, J. (2004) The Word of a Woman? Police, rape and belief. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Kelly, L., Lovett, J., and Regan, L. (2005) A Gap or a Chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases. Home Office Research Study No. 293. London: Home Office.
• Kingi V., and Jordan, J., (with Moeke-Maxwell, T., and Fairbairn-Dunlop, P.) (2009) Responding to sexual violence: Pathways to recovery. Wellington: Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
• Koss, M. (2000) ‘Blame, shame and community’, American Psychologist, 55(11): 1332–1343.
• Lievore, D. (2005) No Longer Silent: a study of women’s help-seeking decisions and service responses to sexual assault. Report prepared by the Australian Institute of Criminology for the Australian Government’s Office for Women. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
• Lievore, D., and Mayhew, P. (2007) The Scale and Nature of Family Violence in New Zealand,. Wellington: Ministry of Social Development.
• Lovett, J., Regan, L., and Kelly, L. (2004) Sexual Assault Referral Centres: developing good practice and maximising potentials. Home Office Research Study No. 285. London: Home Office.
• McDonald, E. (1997) ‘“Real rape” in New Zealand: women complainants’ experience of the court process’, Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence, 1(1): 59–80.
• McFadzean, D., and Scott, K. (2005) ‘Scottish criminal justice and the police’, in D. Donnelly and K. Scott (Eds), Policing Scotland. Willan Publishing. Pp. 202–224.
• McIntosh, I. (2009) ‘Important changes to criminal law.’ http://www.adls.org.nz/filedownload?id=fcf8e91a-3fd6-439c-9188-e9167e6939f6.
• Mossman, E., Jordan, J., MacGibbon, L., Kingi, K., and Moore, L., (2009a) Responding to sexual violence: A review of literature on good practice. Wellington: Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
• NSW Violence against Women Specialist Unit (2006) Improving Service and Criminal Justice Responses to Victims of Sexual Assault: a report of a state-based consultation with adult victims of sexual assault, services and agencies. Sydney: Violence against Women Specialist Unit.
• Oppenheim, A. N. (1992) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement (new edition, reprinted 1997). London: Pinter.
• Orth, U.(2002) ‘Secondary victimization of crime victims by criminal proceedings’, Social Justice Research, 15(4): 313–325.
• Ryan, P. M. (1995) The Reed Dictionary of Modern Māori. Auckland: Reed Books.
• Temkin, J., and Krahé, B. (2008) Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: a question of attitude. Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing.
• Triggs, S., Mossman, E., Jordan, J., and Kingi, V. (2009) Responding to Sexual Violence: attrition in the New Zealand criminal justice system. Wellington: Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
• Tutty, L., Jesso, B., McDonald, B., and Smit, D. (2005) Environmental Scan of Alberta Services to Address Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse. Calgary: University of Calgary.

 

Endnotes

1. For the purposes of this research, medical practitioners did not include another key group providing medical care, the specialist sexual assault doctors (DSAC-trained/accredited doctors)). This group completed a survey that was tailored to their dual role of providing both therapeutic and criminal justice services, the responses from which are dealt with alongside those of criminal justice agencies.

2. The term ‘victim/survivor’ has been replaced with the term ‘victim/complainant’ in relation to criminal justice personnel. This is to more accurately reflect their status within the criminal justice system before any court outcome.

3. Views are based on what would improve conditions for the victim/complainant. This research did not include views of those concerned with the rights of the accused to a fair trial (i.e. defence lawyers).

 

---

For a PDF, click HERE
Or for a HARD COPY, email your details and address to mwa@mwa.govt.nz.

 

This document is made up of six parts. Click on the section you wish to go to.

Current

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

 

---

Disclaimer

This report was commissioned by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in the report are intended to inform and stimulate wider debate. They do not represent government policy.
 

Published in September 2009
by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs | Minitatanga Mō Ngā Wāhine
PO Box 10 049, Wellington, 6143, New Zealand
Phone: 0064 4 915 7112
Fax: 0064 4 916 1604
Email: mwa@mwa.govt.nz
Website: www.mwa.govt.nz

ISBN 978-0-478252-45-3 (Print)
ISBN 978-0-478252-46-0 (Digital)