Scoping the development of specialised and trauma-informed legal services for victims and survivors of sexual assault

Victims of sexual assault are not required to have their own legal representation within the criminal jurisdiction - nor are they currently enabled or encouraged to do so. They may however access legal representation to assist with applying for compensation through a state-based victims of crime compensation scheme or if taking civil action. I think there is considerable merit in adopting the use of the Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA) model in Australia.
I think that the justice needs of sexual assault survivors would be best met through the introduction of specialized courts for sexual offences. Internationally jurisdictions where these are used see more engagement from sexual assault victims as the process is more trauma informed, with lower rates of attrition and higher rates of conviction.

In terms of information about the legal avenues available to victims of sexual assault in Australia there is no consistency of information available on state-based police websites about how to report sexual offences. In South Australia the police website has no information whatsoever about reporting sexual assault. The words sexual assault or rape do not appear under the heading of 'your safety' on the website - but information about domestic violence and child protection is there. Other police websites, such as the Victoria Police website have great information to assist victims of sexual assault who might want to report to police - and there is information clearly displayed from the home page which says "Report a sexual assault to police". If we want more victim/survivors to report the sexual assault to police we need to ensure information appears on police websites so that they know where and how to report this crime.
In terms of information about the legal avenues available to victims of sexual assault in Australia there is no consistency of information available on state-based police websites about how to report sexual offences or how they are prosecuted. People often start their journey by looking at the websites to see what information is available to inform them about the process. In South Australia the police website has no information whatsoever about reporting sexual assault. The words sexual assault or rape do not appear under the heading of 'your safety' on the website - but domestic violence and child protection do. Other police websites, such as the Victoria Police have great information to assist victims of sexual assault who might want to report to police - and there is information clearly displayed from the home page which says "Report a sexual assault to police". If we want more victim/survivors to report the sexual assault to police we need to ensure information appears on police websites so that they know where and how to report this crime. Additionally the Crown Prosecution Service in the United Kingdom provides great information on their website about how sexual offences are prosecuted. Improving the consistency of information by establishing benchmarks for all state-based Offices for the Director of Public Prosecutions would significantly improve access to information for victim/survivors of sexual offences. https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/sexual-offences

I have worked as a counsellor and advocate within the sexual assault sector in South Australia for 32 years. In my experience victim/survivors of sexual assault need access to trauma informed service delivery models with specialized knowledge and expertise. There is significant merit in considering the use of independent sexual violence advocates in Australia and having these services integrated within existing sexual assault services. I also think there are excellent examples of holistic service provision in this area to draw upon internationally. The most effective international example of integrated, holistic service delivery for survivors of sexual harm are Family Justice Centers in the United States. Family Justice Centers and Multi-Agency Centers are multi-agency, multi-disciplinary co-located service centers that provide services to victims of inter-personal violence including, intimate partner violence, sexual assault, child abuse, elder or dependent adult abuse, and human trafficking. Both public and private partner agencies assign staff on a full-time or part-time basis to provide services from one location. Centers focus on reducing the number of times victims tell their story, the number of places victims must go for help, and look to increase access to services and support for victims and their children.
Partner agencies at a Family Justice Center and Multi-Agency Centers may be comprised of, but are not limited to:
Community-based rape crisis, domestic violence, and human trafficking advocates
Law enforcement personnel
Medical personnel
District attorneys and city attorneys
Victim-witness program personnel
Domestic violence shelter service staff
Social service agency staff members
Child welfare agency social workers
County health department staff
City or county public assistance workers
Mental health professionals
Civil legal service providers
https://www.familyjusticecenter.org/affiliated-centers/family-justice-centers-2/

In my experience there are a wide range of reasons why people choose not to report, such as
fear of revictimization by the criminal justice process, fear of retribution from the offender, fear of social rejection if the offender is part of the person's social network, a lack of confidence in the process leading to a just outcome, fear of being blamed or judged harshly by others due to victim blaming attitudes, not wanting the perpetrator to suffer from harsh penalties (particularly where there is a known, trusting relationship between the parties), wanting to just get on with their life and invest their energy into their recovery as often people don't have the energy to invest in both their healing process and the criminal justice process simultaneously, etc....
Access to information and support provided in a trauma informed and survivor centric way makes a huge difference. Having someone to pave the way and walk alongside survivors makes a huge difference to their decision to engage and remain engaged within the process of seeking justice.

In my experience it was more often the case that police decided not to proceed rather than the survivor choosing to disengage from the process. I think greater investment in specialized police and prosecution services would improve the way in which survivors feel supported to continue and it would serve to improve the confidence levels of police and prosecutors to continue with the prosecution of the sexual offence.

I think the premise of this question is flawed. I don't think survivors of sexual offences need a lawyer to assist them from the outset, I think we need to reform existing police and prosecution models to be specialized, enabling them to understand the nature and dynamics of sexual offending better and conduct trauma informed investigations and prosecutions of sexual offences, presided over by judges with specialized knowledge of sexual offences. The investigation and prosecution process we have need to change. There is great disparity across all jurisdictions within Australia as to the level of sexual assault specialization of police and prosecution services and great disparity of training for police, prosecutors and judges. The one thing that all jurisdictions have in common is that reporting levels for sexual offences, prosecution rates and convictions rates remain low in spite of decades of law reform in this area.

When I first started working in the sexual assault sector in South Australia in 1991 we had a better model of policing of sexual offences than exists today. At that time we had a Sexual Assault Unit of police staffed 24 hours a day 7 days a week by plain clothed all female police officers. If a recent sexual assault was reported to police they would go to see the victim in an unmarked police car, arrange a forensic medical examination if needed, transport them to this service and wait until it was finished to drive them home or to an alternative, safe accommodation service, make an appointment to take their statement, then hand it over to the CIB to investigate. This model is no longer in operation and in South Australia we do not have the same level of support for survivors when reporting to police. They have to report to their local police, who might send a marked police car to their location, and uniformed officers will transport them to hospital for a forensic medical examination, walking them through the Emergency Department in full view of staff and waiting patients.
I would like to point out some other significant shortcomings I have experienced in my work as a sexual assault service provider. In South Australia the police will not pay for the use of an interpreter unless a crime has been established. If you can't understand what someone is saying without the use of an interpreter how can a crime be disclosed? I have had the experience of being told by police that I had to attend the police station in person with the victim of a recent sexual assault to report to police, and get an interpreter to attend with us if she couldn't speak English well enough to describe the nature of the sexual assault. I had to say to the person behind the counter at the police station that I was there with someone who had been sexually assaulted and wanted to report to police - in front of others waiting in the reception area at the police station at the time. The organization I was working for at the time paid for the interpreter to attend with us. The police officer behind the counter asked me to provide details of the nature of the sexual assault so that she could determine if a forensic medical would be needed. This situation occurred within the last two years and is just one example of the barriers faced by sexual assault survivors in accessing support from police if from a culturally and linguistically diverse background.
As stated earlier in this submission I think we need to reform existing police and prosecution models to be specialized, enabling them to understand the nature and dynamics of sexual offending better and conduct trauma informed investigations and prosecutions of sexual offences, presided over by judges with specialized knowledge of sexual offences. These services also need to be survivor centric, trauma informed, accessible and culturally safe. There are many international examples of these models in existence, as referenced elsewhere in this submission, and further research regarding international examples of best practice in this area is essential.

The reporting, investigation and prosecution processes we have in Australia for sexual offences need to change. There is great disparity across all jurisdictions within Australia as to the level of sexual assault specialization of police and prosecution services and great disparity of training for police, prosecutors and judges.
As stated earlier in this submission I think we need to reform existing reporting, investigation and prosecution models to be specialized, enabling greater understanding of the nature and dynamics of sexual offending in order to conduct trauma informed investigations and prosecutions of sexual offences, presided over by judges with specialized knowledge of sexual offences. These services also need to be survivor centric, trauma informed, accessible and culturally safe. There are many international examples of these models in existence, as referenced elsewhere in this submission, and research regarding international examples of best practice in this area is essential.

Restorative justice models as an alternative to prosecution is also important to consider in delivering therapeutic justice to survivors of sexual harm. These are currently in use in organizational settings such as religious organizations who offer 'in house' redress options such as the offer of an apology, funded counselling services and financial payment in recognition of the impact of the harm the sexual offending caused. This is similar to the National Redress Scheme (NRS) however the 'in house' models and mentioned are often designed to be easier to engage with and can deliver higher financial settlements when compared to the NRS.

The reporting, investigation and prosecution processes we have in Australia need to be reformed to be specialized in responding to the realities of sexual offending. There is great disparity across all jurisdictions within Australia as to the level of sexual assault specialization and great disparity of training for police, prosecutors and judges. There will be no tangible advantage in providing legal services to sexual assault survivors if the reporting, investigation and prosecution processes and practices themselves are not reformed to be more responsive to the realities of sexual offending.

Data from survivors about their views on if they felt they were believed when disclosing their experiences of sexual assault, informed of their options, and supported regarding the choices they made to engage with the process. Data should be collected too from the workers involved too about their observations and experiences with survivors.

The Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview technique is used in the United States by police when interviewing sexual assault survivors. It incorporates scientific evidence of the nature and impact of trauma on people's ability to recall and describe the traumatic event. More information is available from the following websites:
https://reid.com/resources/investigator-tips/the-forensic-experiential-trauma-interview-feti
https://www.certifiedfeti.com/
The use of counter intuitive expert testimony in sexual offences as is used in New Zealand - currently this model is used for child sexual offences but could be expanded to all forms of sexual offending, including offences against adults - more information from the following website:
https://nzfvc.org.nz/news/counterintuitive-evidence-considered-substantially-helpful-child-sexual-abuse-cases