Elizabeth Holtzman Chair Judicial Proceedings Panel

Transcription

1 JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS PANEL ONE LIBERTY CENTER 875 NORTH RANDOLPH STREET ARLINGTON, VA March 6,2017 Mr. Anthony Kurta Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy 1000 Defense Pentagon Washington, D.C Dear Mr. Kurta: The Judicial Proceedings Since Fiscal Year 2012 Amendments Panel (Judicial Proceedings Panel or JPP), a congressionally mandated federal advisory committee, is continuing its review and assessment of judicial proceedings conducted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) involving adult sexual assault and related offenses. We request your assistance with providing a presenter for the April 7, 2017 JPP public meeting. We also request written responses to the attached Judicial Proceedings Panel Request for Information, Set 11 by March 28, Question 164 requests information as to the extent to which, if any, the Department of Defense (DoD) has implemented the JPP recommendations to (1) use a document-based model for collecting and analyzing data on the adjudication of sexual assault cases, and (2) include information related to all adult sexual assault complaints in one annual DoD report. Question 165 requests information related to the Sexual Assault Data Initiative established by Secretary Carter in May Since the Judicial Proceedings Panel is an advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, all comments received by the Judicial Proceedings Panel will be treated as publicly releasable and made available for inspection or copying by the public. My point of contact is Captain Tammy Tideswell, JAGC, U.S. Navy, JPP Staff Director, who may be reached at (703) or via at tammy.p.tideswell.mil@mail.mil. Attachment: Thank you for your support and assistance. Sincerely, f C Elizabeth Holtzman Chair Judicial Proceedings Panel Judicial Proceedings Panel Request for Information, Set 11

2 JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS PANEL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION, SET 11 Responses requested by March 28, Judicial Proceedings Panel (JPP) Request For Information To the Department of Defense (DoD) I. The Judicial Proceedings Panel (JPP) requests written responses to Questions 164 and 165 below by March 28, In addition, the JPP requests a presentation from Dr. Elizabeth Van Winkle, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness, at the April 7, 2017, JPP public meeting to explain the written responses and address any questions from the Panel. If Dr. Van Winkle is not available, please contact Captain Tammy Tideswell, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Staff Director, JPP to discuss options. Captain Tideswell can be reached at II. Question 164: Implementation of JPP Recommendations 37 and 38 regarding sexual assault case data collection and reporting A. Please provide a written explanation of the status of JPP Recommendations 37 and 38 which are provided as Attachment 1. If you have implemented the JPP recommendations, in whole or in part, please explain how. If you have not implemented the following JPP recommendations, please explain the reason(s) why not. B. Please provide a response to the following questions specific to JPP Recommendation 38: 1. Will legal disposition information for cases reported by the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) be included in the next annual report from the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO)? 2. Section 544 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17 NDAA), Extension of the Requirement for Annual Report Regarding Sexual Assaults and Coordination with Release of Family Advocacy Program Report, provides that the SAPRO and FAP annual reports to Congress shall be issued simultaneously. How does Section 544 affect SAPRO s coordination with the FAP office regarding the inclusion of legal disposition data on FAP cases in the annual SAPRO report, if at all? Note: The Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel, in its June 2014 report to the Secretary of Defense, similarly recommended that the SAPRO and FAP case data be combined in one report (RSP Recommendation 66). The Secretary of Defense issued a response to the RSP Report on December 15, 2014 (Attachment 2). The recommendation matrix lists the status of this recommendation as Refer to Working Group OPR: USD (P&R). III. Question 165: Results of the DoD Sexual Assault Data Collection Initiative As detailed in Attachment 3, the Secretary of Defense announced the partnership between the Defense Digital Service, SAPRO, and FAP. This partnership was designed to enhance the transparency and delivery of sexual assault data. Please provide the information gathered as part of the comprehensive discovery sprint and the recommendations made to the Secretary of Defense in response to this partnership, to include subsequent actions, orders, or policies implemented.

3 Judicial Proceedings Panel Recommendations 37 and 38 JPP Recommendation 37: The Department of Defense collect and analyze case adjudication data using a standardized, document-based collection model, similar to systems used by the Judicial Proceedings Panel or U.S. Sentencing Commission, that incorporates uniform definitions and categories across all of the military Services. DoD does not collect sufficient adjudication data to fully assess how adult sexual assault cases are resolved through the military justice system. Other than case information entered by Service legal officers into DoD s database, DoD does not centrally collect and manage information about military justice processing in sexual assault cases. The military Services, however, have Service-specific systems, tailored to a decentralized, command-driven military justice system, to collect and manage information for cases that occur in their Service. The JPP developed an electronic database, modeled on the database used by the U.S. Sentencing Commission, for collecting and analyzing information from court-martial case documents. This system was used to accumulate procedural information from courtmartial documents for the data analysis in this report. Collecting standard information from court-martial documents regarding dispositions, charges, outcomes, and punishments imposed in adult sexual assault cases could improve Service-level analysis and could be incorporated into DoD s reports to Congress. Because the Judge Advocate General s Corps administer military justice in each of the military Services, case adjudication data could be compiled and analyzed by the Services in a manner compatible with DoD s electronic database and congressional reporting requirements. At a minimum, analysis of how adult sexual assault cases are resolved through the military justice system would be improved by the collection of the following case information: all sexual assault charges that were preferred and the outcome of each charge, including whether the charge was referred to court-martial, dismissed, or resolved by alternate means; type of court-martial held; pleas of the accused; trial forum; findings; sentence; and convening authority action on the findings and sentence. 1

4 Judicial Proceedings Panel Recommendations 37 and 38 Because procedural data do not provide complete information about a case, they must be supplemented by potentially relevant case facts and evidentiary issues. Such information may include characteristics of the victim, the relationship between the accused and victim, whether the victim made a prompt report, whether the victim was willing to cooperate, whether the victim engaged in any risk-taking behavior around the time of the incident, and the presence of eyewitnesses or physical evidence. JPP Recommendation 38: The Department of Defense include legal disposition information related to all adult sexual assault complaints in one annual DoD report, changing its policy that excludes adult-victim cases that are handled by the Family Advocacy Program from Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office reports. DoD SAPRO annually provides Congress with a description of the resolution of each unrestricted report of sexual assault covered by DoD s sexual assault prevention and response policy; however, that policy precludes reporting on adult sexual assault cases involving victims who are Service members spouses, intimate partners, or family members over the age of consent under the UCMJ (16 years of age), for whom the DoD Family Advocacy Program (FAP) provides victim advocacy services. FAP does not collect or report case adjudication data for the sexual assault reports it receives, even when FAP provides victim advocacy services through completion of a court-martial for a sexual assault crime. Because these cases are excluded from DoD s reports on the legal resolution of sexual assault cases, it is not possible to accurately determine how many sexual assault cases are handled through the military justice system. Requiring sexual assault case disposition and adjudication data from FAP to be reported by DoD in its annual report to Congress would ensure a complete accounting of all adult sexual assault cases involving a military member. The Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel, in its June 2014 report to the Secretary of Defense, examined this issue and similarly recommended it be corrected. 2

5