Rape "case cleared"

[Gun Nut]

https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/case-cleared-part-1/

This is an audio podcast that lasts an hour. It is well researched and fully described.

When police closed the rape case against Bryan Kind, they made it look like it had been solved. But he never was arrested – or even charged. We team up with Newsy and ProPublica to investigate how police across the country make it seem like they’re solving more rape cases than they actually are.

Many cities in the USA whose police departments are calling tens of thousands of rape cases "cleared" when the made no effort to arrest the rapist.
These are cases where there is enough evidence to support probable cause, and the police decide to never make an arrest.
The suspects walk free. No arrest, no accountability.
To rape again.


Because - why? Why would you NOT follow this up!?

Rape culture?
Because rapes don't seem so bad to these police officers? Why do they not care enough to arrest the guy they have probably cause to believe committed a rape?


Oh, look how often rape cases are "solved," "brought to justice," Look, you women, we're taking care of the problem, right? What are you complaining about?


Given this, do you really also believe the police when they mark a case as "not sufficient evidence?" (which men interpret as "false claim")
You shouldn't.

So I Googled "Bryan Kind" Rape, and could only find podcasts and replays of podcasts... peculiar, that... So I then Googled "Bryan Kind" Police and found this...

According to the Janesville Police Department, they responded to a report of a man staying at the Ramada Inn on Milton Ave. with what appeared to be a juvenile girl. When police arrived at the hotel the 16-year-old girl was not present and the adult male, Bryan Kind, age 31 of Michigan, was arrested.

Authorities said Kind had been communicating with the teen girl for about a year using various apps and internet messaging sites...

So, this is the "rape" that police have covered up or refused to investigate and is indicative of a huge national problem... a case of a girl traveling to see an older boy and have sex with him in a hotel... THAT is how women are being mistreated? That a stranger called rape on two people having sex with each other in a hotel, and neither party involved in the sex had a complaint... and THAT is what women desperately need changed?
I suppose it's because women are feeble-minded, or maybe just because they are physically week, the men of the world need to protect them from their own decisions and the police must follow through with any person's concern of a female stranger... for that girl's own good. That's the message?

 

[Gun Nut]

Kind is being charged for Sex with a Child (3 counts), Child Enticement-Exposing Sex Organ, and Possession of Child Pornography. He is currently being held at the Rock County Jail

So they didn't do "nothing"... They investigated and then what? failing to secure an actual complaint from any "victim".. shall we have a phone line to call in any man and have them arrested on any other person's say-so.

 

[ruby sparks]

Kind is being charged for Sex with a Child (3 counts), Child Enticement-Exposing Sex Organ, and Possession of Child Pornography. He is currently being held at the Rock County Jail

So they didn't do "nothing"... They investigated and then what? failing to secure an actual complaint from any "victim".. shall we have a phone line to call in any man and have them arrested on any other person's say-so.

I also did some googling. I did get confused. I ended up thinking (without being sure) that the case in the podcast was an earlier one in which Bryan Kind was not even interviewed, and the one I found by googling was perhaps a later case, in which he was interviewed, charged and convicted. I got the impression that he may have been a rather nasty character. I even wondered if it could be said that he remained free to carry out the second crime partly because he was not interviewed, charged or punished for the first one.

But as I said, it wasn't clear to me. It seemed unlikely it was a different Bryan Kind, but there seemed to be at least two different cases in different locations.

If I surmised correctly, then it would seem possible that the case in the podcast might be an example of the unwelcome and perhaps awful consequences of the issues raised in the OP.

The case you refer to was I think from May 2017.

https://www.nbc15.com/content/news/...d-and-possession-of-child-porn-421823913.html

When was the podcast incident, I wonder? The date of the podcast is November 2018.

ETA: the podcast incident was May 2016. Now I am even more confused. Was it the same incident as the one in the above link?

 

[ruby sparks]

Ok. All clear now. Bryan Kind was indeed arrested and charged for activity in Janesville, Wisconsin. I'm still confused as to whether it was 2016 or 2017 (podcast says the former, link says latter).

But Bryan Kind had been investigated previously in Baltimore, in 2015-2016, for sex with a 13 year old girl, never arrested, and it was that previous case, not the Janesville one, which was deemed 'exceptionally Cleared'.

Part of the reason appears to be the non-participation of the victim and her family in the investigation after it was passed over to the relevant police authority. Bryan kind had initially been interviewed and investigated by a neighbouring police authority prior to the case being passed to a second police authority with responsibility for the specific (hotel) location in which the incident took place. The latter (second) authority never interviewed Bryan Kind, saying that they did not proceed with the case because of victim non-involvement.

In any event, Bryan Kind remained free and went on to be later charged (and I think jailed) for another offence, in Janesville.

 

[Gun Nut]

It sounds like the pattern may have been that other people reported his activities with the girls, and not the girls themselves... as if his crimes were against humanity in general rather than against the actual person he was with.

Its seems it is (and should be) hard to prosecute someone when the alleged victim does not consider themselves as a victim.

 

[ruby sparks]

It sounds like the pattern may have been that other people reported his activities with the girls, and not the girls themselves... as if his crimes were against humanity in general rather than against the actual person he was with.

Its seems it is (and should be) hard to prosecute someone when the alleged victim does not consider themselves as a victim.

The first victim (near Baltimore) was apparently 12 when she started seeing him. Fwiw, that's the same age my younger sister was when she was seduced and raped in our home by a man in his 30's, a local man who did odd jobs around the house. She says now that she wasn't sure what the 'rules' were, what she should do or what was happening at the time, and blamed herself, not the man. It occurred several times.

Coincidentally, my mum aged 12 was in the middle of a phase of regular abuse by an 'uncle' that lasted several years, every summer holiday between the ages of 9 and 14. She never told anyone, anyone at all, until a few weeks before she died aged 85, in 2011, when she told me. Dad had already passed away.

This guy, Bryan Kind, had child porn on his phone, apparently. He was 31.

 

[Gun Nut]

I'm not for abusing children.. and this guy sounds like a sexual predator (violent or not)... I'm just saying that I can understand the problem law enforcement has trying to lock up people whose victims don't even feel like victims until much later in life... It's a challenging situation that, in my opinion, begins at home with good parental communication.

 

[ruby sparks]

I'm not for abusing children.. and this guy sounds like a sexual predator (violent or not)... I'm just saying that I can understand the problem law enforcement has trying to lock up people whose victims don't even feel like victims until much later in life... It's a challenging situation that, in my opinion, begins at home with good parental communication.

Yes, of course, and I believe that one (arguably valid) reason for 'exceptionally cleared' cases, and a percentage of them, is in fact because those reporting as victims do not want to pursue. Which is of course not necessarily the same thing as not feeling they were a victim. For some it might just be a reluctance to go through the process.

 

[laughing dog]

All cases investigated by the police have probable cause - 100% Please learn the difference between sufficient probable cause to investigate and sufficient evidence to prosecute.

Male and female prosecutors (both) have to have sufficient prima facie evidence to justify taking the matter to court. I don't know why you think this is a gender issue.

It's not. It's an evidentiary hurdle.

The DA of Ramsey County, Mn refused to take a case of statutory rape to court even though there was DNA evidence and no dispute that sex had occurred because the victim's story changed a little bit from the 1st telling to the 2nd telling.

The Star Tribune of Minneapolis had a series of stories of how poorly the police investigated rape complaints.

This forum had a thread on a rape victim who was bullied by the police to recant even though she had bee raped. Another investigator from another jurisdiction read the initial police report and noticed that it fit the pattern of a serial rapist that he/she was investigating.

So, the OP has some traction, because both the police and the DA have lots of discretion over what and how they proceed, and there is plenty of evidence that they do not uniformly use that discretion wisely or fairly.

 

[ruby sparks]

Yesterday, I found a 2010 study online which looked into attitudes in the Police force in two Southeastern states in the US as regards how they viewed reports of rape. 891 officers took part. The general conclusions were: "The study found that the majority of police officers view the overall crime of rape as a serious one, however, approximately 6% provided sexist feedback that supports rape myths".

There is more detail in the report and I can post it if anyone wants to read it. Personally, I was (relatively) quite relieved, for a change. Only 6%? Of course, however well-designed the survey questions are, self-reporting may mask.

But my overall impression, which is subjective and anecdotal, is that most police and indeed public prosecutors these days, and I'm thinking of the UK, are in fact keen to detect and punish rapists. I think the balance in their attitudes has shifted. I'm not starry-eyed about saying that. My guess is that it has taken a lot of time and effort and that in some cases individuals have had to be pressured to operate in a certain (better, more enlightened) way. And no doubt more can be done and needs to be done.

My guess is that it's patchwork and complicated and that a lack of resources may now be one of the biggest obstacles. Financial cuts here have been massive. So what happens is mistakes and imperfect processes, for all parties, including the police not disclosing material which might give an advantage to those defending people accused of rape (there was a minor spate of such cases here which prompted a major review, and Britain’s biggest police force, The London Metropolitan, has apparently since abandoned its official policy of 'automatically believing victims' after a series of flawed inquiries into alleged sex crimes). The suggestion being that police and public prosecutors are responding to pressure to improve their stats, by almost any means necessary. And this 'exceptionally cleared' massaging the data thing in the OP seems to be an example of something similar but erring in the opposite direction. League tables and targets sometimes get too much priority, for a variety of reasons, not least that hitting targets (on paper) this year can affect next year's funding, etc.

 

[Toni]

And also of the justifiable outrage generated against the Catholic church over decades (at least) of the sexual abuse of boys. And not to see this as any kind of....double standard.

Do priests who rape little girls garner less outrage than priests who rape little boys?

Does the rape of adult women garner less outrage than the rape of adult men?

Be honest. Double standard indeed.

Yes, actually. I think there are two reasons: 1. Homophobia and 2. Most men can more easily empathize with little boys who are victimized than little girls.

There is very little public hue and outcry about the abuses of little girls at the hands of priests. Girls being abused by their teachers/coaches is much less newsworthy than boys who are seduced by their female teachers/coaches or worse: male coaches. Everyone knows the name of Mary Kay Letourneau. I can't think of the name of a single male teacher or coach who was accused or convicted of sexual abuse of female students.

Rape of adult males vs adult females? For the most part, the only rapes of men that are really acknowledged are what happens in prisons and is horribly often the butt of some terrible jokes. For reasons I am certain you are more cognizant of than I am, it is harder for men to report being raped than it is for women to report--and that's a pretty significant level of difficulty. I've written about this multiple times: it's horrendous that male victims of sexual assault face even bigger obstacles than do female victims. It's wrong. Terribly wrong. If you look back, I am often the only person in threads about rape that ever mention male victims.

Look outside the church: Look at Penn State and the abuse of little boys. It took a long, long time to come out but once it became public, there was swift action. Not without some blowback, though and some suggestions that the boys were willing participants if indeed anything happened. This is what happens when someone is so revered that they are considered to be incapable of doing wrong.

I will say that there is (finally) a sea change and Larry Nassar's victims were finally able to get justice. Some victims attempted to come forward years ago--and were shut down. In my opinion, the prosecution of Nassar is largely because of the Penn State case.

Those are outliers, though.

In my area--and it is truly not different anywhere else, the rapes of young girls does not result in much jail time, if any, for the perpetrators. The rapes of young boys is seen as much more serious. At least by law enforcement and the courts, which are largely male. My theory is that it is easier for men to empathize with male victims. Female victims are seen as more suspect, as being seductive or lying. Or both. Just read any thread about rape on this forum. Two or three posters will reliably start talking about false accusations instead of about why someone is victimized.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I don't agree at all that rapes of little boys are given more outcry than rapes of little girls. I haven't heard of a case of a woman raping a young boy where he wasn't accused of enjoying it. I haven't heard of a case of an adult woman raping an adult man that pretty much anybody takes seriously. I haven't heard of a case of a man raping another man where the raped man isn't mocked and emasculated.

But that's just me. I am not buying your double standard in favour of male victims here. I think the opposite is quite apparent across the spectrum, unless you conflate it (as you did) by comparing male child victims to female adult victims, and even then, only if the victimizer is an adult male.

And I think I know why. I think it ties directly I to the stereotypes of woman as weak vulnerable incapable victim and man as strong aggressive capable predator. I think that cultural image explains many sexist double standards against both men and women.

Your conflation changes it because children are seen as even more weak and vulnerable. The elderly may also be. That would be an interesting study.

 

[Lion IRC]

All cases investigated by the police have probable cause - 100% Please learn the difference between sufficient probable cause to investigate and sufficient evidence to prosecute.

Male and female prosecutors (both) have to have sufficient prima facie evidence to justify taking the matter to court. I don't know why you think this is a gender issue.

It's not. It's an evidentiary hurdle.

The DA of Ramsey County, Mn refused to take a case of statutory rape to court even though there was DNA evidence and no dispute that sex had occurred because the victim's story changed a little bit from the 1st telling to the 2nd telling.

The Star Tribune of Minneapolis had a series of stories of how poorly the police investigated rape complaints.

This forum had a thread on a rape victim who was bullied by the police to recant even though she had bee raped. Another investigator from another jurisdiction read the initial police report and noticed that it fit the pattern of a serial rapist that he/she was investigating.

So, the OP has some traction, because both the police and the DA have lots of discretion over what and how they proceed, and there is plenty of evidence that they do not uniformly use that discretion wisely or fairly.

I don't dispute that many probable cause / probable guilt cases don't make it to court. Perhaps 9 guilty men do go free for the sake of the 1 innocent man who really did seek and obtain the informed consent of the woman who now falsely accuses him. And it's one persons (uncorroborated) word over another's.

But DNA evidence can't give us proof that the mans semen was trespassing. DNA can't tell us whether no means no. DNA isn't much help when the drunken, casual hook up sex took place 20 years ago.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm not for abusing children.. and this guy sounds like a sexual predator (violent or not)... I'm just saying that I can understand the problem law enforcement has trying to lock up people whose victims don't even feel like victims until much later in life... It's a challenging situation that, in my opinion, begins at home with good parental communication.

Yes, of course, and I believe that one (arguably valid) reason for 'exceptionally cleared' cases, and a percentage of them, is in fact because those reporting as victims do not want to pursue. Which is of course not necessarily the same thing as not feeling they were a victim. For some it might just be a reluctance to go through the process.

There's also the normal reason for exceptionally cleared--the guy is dead or serving a major sentence already, no point in prosecuting.

 

[laughing dog]

All cases investigated by the police have probable cause - 100% Please learn the difference between sufficient probable cause to investigate and sufficient evidence to prosecute.

Male and female prosecutors (both) have to have sufficient prima facie evidence to justify taking the matter to court. I don't know why you think this is a gender issue.

It's not. It's an evidentiary hurdle.

The DA of Ramsey County, Mn refused to take a case of statutory rape to court even though there was DNA evidence and no dispute that sex had occurred because the victim's story changed a little bit from the 1st telling to the 2nd telling.

The Star Tribune of Minneapolis had a series of stories of how poorly the police investigated rape complaints.

This forum had a thread on a rape victim who was bullied by the police to recant even though she had bee raped. Another investigator from another jurisdiction read the initial police report and noticed that it fit the pattern of a serial rapist that he/she was investigating.

So, the OP has some traction, because both the police and the DA have lots of discretion over what and how they proceed, and there is plenty of evidence that they do not uniformly use that discretion wisely or fairly.

I don't dispute that many probable cause / probable guilt cases don't make it to court. Perhaps 9 guilty men do go free for the sake of the 1 innocent man who really did seek and obtain the informed consent of the woman who now falsely accuses him. And it's one persons (uncorroborated) word over another's.

Wow, you just cannot help but blurt out bs (the bold-faced)

But DNA evidence can't give us proof that the mans semen was trespassing. DNA can't tell us whether no means no. DNA isn't much help when the drunken, casual hook up sex took place 20 years ago.

What are you babbling about?

 

[ruby sparks]

I'm not for abusing children.. and this guy sounds like a sexual predator (violent or not)... I'm just saying that I can understand the problem law enforcement has trying to lock up people whose victims don't even feel like victims until much later in life... It's a challenging situation that, in my opinion, begins at home with good parental communication.

Yes, of course, and I believe that one (arguably valid) reason for 'exceptionally cleared' cases, and a percentage of them, is in fact because those reporting as victims do not want to pursue. Which is of course not necessarily the same thing as not feeling they were a victim. For some it might just be a reluctance to go through the process.

There's also the normal reason for exceptionally cleared--the guy is dead or serving a major sentence already, no point in prosecuting.

Yes, but are either of those common enough to be called the 'normal' ones? Perhaps you only meant 'normal' as in 'less controversial' rather than being a 'norm'. I'll assume the former (and set aside the question of whether not pursuing a case just because the accused is already serving a sentence for another crime is or isn't at least slightly controversial in some ways).

In any case, my impression from reading around was that they were nowhere near as common as other reasons. I read (in the US study below) that the two main reasons (together accounting for 47% of all exceptional clearances) are (a) victim refusal or disinclination to take part (or withdrawal of complaint) and (b) prosecution being declined (evidence deemed insufficient).

When a Cleared Rape Is Not Cleared
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260515569062?journalCode=jiva

"Of the 16,231 cleared rapes in 238 departments, nearly half (47%) results in exceptional clearance when the victim refuses to cooperate or when prosecution is declined."

In another (UK) report, it is said that those two reasons account for 75% of cases not being pursued to charges:

Investigating and detecting recorded offences of rape
https://webarchive.nationalarchives...s.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/rdsolr1807.pdf

"Amongst crimed cases that did not result in a charge, withdrawal of the complaint by the victim and insufficient evidence were the most common reasons identified for not charging (35% and 40% respectively)."

IF those two figures (47% against 75%) are correct, and if it can be assumed that death of the accused plus accused already being in prison only accounts for a part of the remainder, it does raise the question of what accounts for the majority (remaining 53%) of exceptional clearances in the USA and the possibility (sorry Americans) that there may be more shenanigans going on there than in the UK.



But, whatever way we slice it in either or any country, massaging the statistics to make it seem like more is being done with more success nevertheless appears to also be not uncommon, and exceptionally clearing some cases is apparently not the only method used. Others (for the USA) are highlighted here:

How to Lie with Rape Statistics: America’s Hidden Rape Crisis
https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/vol...-rape-statistics-americas-hidden-rape-crisis/

I would be surprised if these practices only happened in relation to rapes or sexual assaults. Given that police, prosecutors and indeed politicians in power are generally operating with limited resources and under significant pressure to nevertheless appear as successful as possible and are held accountable in several ways, they probably happen in relation to crimes generally. Whether the situation (in this specific sense) is worse for rape I don't know, but it does seem to at least be a non-insignificant issue within that category.

As ever, those with a particular interest in and focus on the issue of and injustices surrounding rape (perhaps especially the rape of women) will tend to cite attitudes, discrimination and sexism (and possibly patriarchy) and perhaps wonder about things like rape culture (or apply the term in some cases). And those on the other 'side' will underplay such things and point to different, more valid and justifiable factors and the progress that has been made generally. And media articles (and indeed some politicians, such as Harriet harman for instance) will unfortunately tend to use 'soundbite' figures or numbers that are intended to grab the short-term attention of the listeners. And as almost always, the actual, accurate, balanced truth is probably somewhere in the middle and the issues more complicated and nuanced than often presented, and erring too much in either direction or the issues being overstated (exaggerated) or understated (minimised) can be counterproductive in different ways and for a variety of reasons, for example the risk that the apparently false perception that rape conviction (and/or charging) rates are lower than for other crimes might deter victims from reporting and pursuing cases.

 

[ruby sparks]

It might also be added that victims not wanting to pursue is not a factor that occurs in isolation or for necessarily simple or non-controversial reasons. It certainly does not indicate that the person does not feel they were a victim or that no crime occurred, and things such as how their case is responded to likely come into play (as well as their general preconceptions, which may in some cases be awry in at least some ways, see my last point above) and I read in that study above ('How to Lie with Rape Statistics: America’s Hidden Rape Crisis') that in some cases, complainants are pressured, by police, to drop a case.

Similar-ish nuanced observations could be made about the cases where police do lay charges (which is in over 50% of reported cases, apparently, which of course says nothing about under-reporting) but there is then deemed (by public prosecutors) to be insufficient evidence. This would seem to account for something like (slight guess) 25% (USA) and 40% (UK) of reported cases. One would hope that this standard is applied impartially and for good reasons. Perhaps in some cases it isn't. Given that we live in a less than ideal world, I would not be surprised, which would then make the question be about 'how much or how often' it is happening for the 'wrong' reasons and whether or how much the reasons are justified, perhaps pragmatically. And as Tom Sawyer recently pointed out, the (perhaps unhelpful or flawed) attitudes of the public (especially perhaps jurors) may come into play and it could be asked if thinking about the correct priorities should make us address or emphasise the possible shortcomings of that rather than be disinclined to take cases to court.

The upside is that progress has been and apparently is being made and that there seems to be increasing understanding and acceptance of the need for more of it and for more scrutiny, both within the general public and within those professions who deal with it. Sometimes it's a case of going too far in well-meaning attempts, and then readjusting, for example the London Met Police not so long ago implementing a policy of 'believing all victims' and then more recently, because of a spate of flawed outcomes, drawing back from that and instead emphasising 'having an open mind' which would arguably have been the better change of policy the first time around.

 

[ruby sparks]

Rape of adult males vs adult females? For the most part, the only rapes of men that are really acknowledged are what happens in prisons and is horribly often the butt of some terrible jokes. For reasons I am certain you are more cognizant of than I am, it is harder for men to report being raped than it is for women to report--and that's a pretty significant level of difficulty. I've written about this multiple times: it's horrendous that male victims of sexual assault face even bigger obstacles than do female victims. It's wrong. Terribly wrong. If you look back, I am often the only person in threads about rape that ever mention male victims.

Well said, and as you say not for the first time on your part, and I admit I'm glad you brought it up here rather than me, for fear that it might be thought I was trying to steer the discussion away from female victim issues and onto men's issues instead.

It is arguably not strictly speaking on-topic to mention what happens in prison, but that is partly only because it is not usually taken into account in either discussions or data (and partly because it is a slightly different issue). But I read of official estimates (and I can find them again if asked) that there are possibly (incredibly perhaps) several thousand more rapes of male prisoners than there are of women in free society, annually, in the USA. Figures of 100,000-140,000 for the former versus 95,000 for the latter (taking into account estimates of under-reporting in both cases, I believe) and given the relatively small proportion of male prisoners versus female non-prisoners, this, if accurate, would indicate a much higher rate of incidence per capita for the former compared to the latter. And by and large, not much or certainly not enough is done about it, so that a prisoner's case often does not even get to the stage where 'exceptionally cleared' is an officially-recognised issue or term. And of course that comparison says nothing about rapes of men in free society, which arguably could be added (along with rapes of women in prison, for which I believe the rates are also disproportionately high) to overall numbers.

I am not trying to say who has it worse, men or women, boys or girls. All victims have it bad. And it is far and away mostly men who are the perpetrators in any case, definitely for rape and serious sexual and physical assault or abuse (even if it may be the case that there have been at least somewhat more female perpetrators than traditionally thought and/or the comparative rates by sex are closer together if less serious assaults and behaviours are included). Sometimes, some information just surprises me, such as the figures above regarding comparative numbers of victims of rape, and I think it's worthy of briefly adding it to the discussion.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I do every now and then hear about female prisoners abused or raped by male prison guards, but very rarely, and it garners less outrage than civilian women being victims. Male prisoners being raped and abused by other prisoners is commonplace, and by prison guards happens as well. Few seem to care about it. I imagine a case of a male prisoner sexually assaulted by a female prison guard would be outright laughed at and she may even be celebrated, especially if he was put in jail for a sexual assault (or false conviction of one) of his own. It would be interesting to see just how exactly the stats mirror my social expectations theory wherein gender, age, and other markers of perceived vulnerability are measured against outrage levels, and to what extent (if any) Toni's theory of misogynistic not caring about women factors into it.

 

[ruby sparks]

As far as I am aware, having done a bit more googling (and I stand to be corrected) almost all (98% of) sexual assaults/rapes of female prisoners are by male guards. I believe the rates are much lower than for assaults on females by other female inmates and female guards. As for assaults/rapes of male prisoners, I think these are almost always perpetrated by other male prisoners and possibly male guards. I wouldn't be surprised if there were exceptions in all cases. LGBTQ inmates are most at risk, apparently, although I think if you're straight you're at risk too.

Female Inmates and Sexual Assault
https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2014/09/christina-piecora-female-inmates/