What Is The Difference Between Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment?

Sexual Harassment Can Be Addressed In Both The Civil And Criminal Justice Systems

Sexual harassment in an organization, while perhaps not surprisingly, can include criminal sexual assault actions, in which case they are reported internally and/or to law enforcement and/or through the civil courts. For example, if someone is raped at work or in school, or in an employment setting (such as by a superior, at a work-related event, or even by a client), this might constitute both criminal conduct and sexual harassment. The administrative and legal investigations can proceed at the same time if sexual harassment is reported both inside the company and to law enforcement. Law enforcement may want the organization to hold off its inquiry until a criminal case has completed its procedure, and criminal defendants will not want to testify on the record in a civil claim before the hearing on the criminal case. However, complainants have a stake in a quick investigation and both businesses and educational institutions must respond to complaints in a timely manner. This is especially true since the investigation may lead to organizational adjustments that will allow students and employees to stay in school or at work without further abuse or harassment. Victims may also require the organization to provide interim housing and safety precautions while the legal process runs its course. There are a variety of methods for integrating criminal and administrative investigations. The campus law enforcement agency in some colleges and universities conducts both criminal and administrative inquiries. Others delay the administration investigation while the criminal case progresses. Some institutions have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with campus or local law enforcement that sets out the duties and obligations of both systems. In fact, some schools have established an MOU with local law enforcement detailing the responsibilities of a co-investigation. The criminal justice process continues as normal, but university officials are invited to observe interviews or read statements “in real-time.” This method allows victims, witnesses, and respondents to give their main statement once rather than multiple times. The objective is to minimize trauma as well as inconsistencies that might arise from varied interview techniques and the documentation completed by several interviewers. Interagency communication is improved and interim safety measures may be taken more quickly owing to the time it takes for a criminal justice investigation and potential prosecution. However, applying this model necessitates careful planning when tackling a number of complex issues, including confidentiality safeguards and the systems’ varied goals. In certain situations, the questions that must be answered for a criminal versus administrative investigation might differ.