Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:11 pm
Time: 8:11 pm
Results for sexual misconduct
3 results foundAuthor: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Evaluation and Inspections Division Title: The Handling of Sexual Harassment and Misconduct Allegations by the Department's Law Enforcement Components Summary: The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) conducted this review to assess how the Department of Justice's (Department) four law enforcement components respond to sexual misconduct and harassment allegations made against their employees. This review examined the nature, frequency, reporting, investigation, and adjudication of such allegations in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); and the United States Marshals Service (USMS). The findings in today's report include: - Component supervisors did not always report allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct to their respective internal affairs offices as required by component policies. In several instances, these supervisors were not disciplined for their failure to report. Additionally, at the FBI and USMS, the internal affairs offices chose not to investigate some allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct despite significant evidence that misconduct had occurred, and DEA's internal affairs office did not always fully investigate allegations of sexual misconduct related to prostitution. - At ATF, DEA, and USMS, we found a lack of coordination between the internal affairs offices and security personnel. As a result, security departments at these components were sometimes unaware of allegations that may impact an employee's eligibility to hold a security clearance and access classified information. In contrast, we found that the FBI's internal affairs office alerts the FBI security department to any such misconduct allegations it receives. - All of the components we reviewed either did not have adequate offense tables or did not properly use their offense tables for charging employees with sexual harassment and sexual misconduct offenses. The offense tables at ATF, DEA, and USMS did not contain adequate language to address the solicitation of prostitutes in jurisdictions where the conduct is legal or tolerated. The FBI offense table contains such a category, but we found instances where general offense categories were applied instead of the specific category. - All four components have weaknesses in detecting the transmission of sexually explicit text messages and images by employees. Although the FBI archives and proactively monitors its employees' text messages, there are limitations to its ability to use this information, and misconduct investigators at ATF, DEA, and USMS cannot easily obtain such text message evidence. These issues may hamper the components' ability to conduct misconduct investigations, fulfill their discovery obligations, and deter misconduct. Finally, today's report notes that the OIG's ability to conduct this review was significantly impacted and unnecessarily delayed by repeated difficulties we had in obtaining relevant information from both the FBI and DEA. Specifically, the FBI and DEA initially refused to provide the OIG with unredacted information which the OIG was entitled to receive under the Inspector General Act. When they finally did provide the information without extensive redactions, we found that it still was incomplete. We were also concerned by an apparent decision by DEA to withhold information regarding a particular open misconduct case despite the fact that the OIG was authorized to receive the information. Because of these difficulties, we cannot be completely confident that the FBI and DEA provided us with all information relevant to this review. Our report reflects the findings and conclusions we reached based on the information made available to us. The report makes eight recommendations to improve the law enforcement components' disciplinary and security processes relating to allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment. The DOJ and the four components reviewed concurred with all of the recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2015. 139p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 2, 2015 at: http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/2015/e1504.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/2015/e1504.pdf Shelf Number: 135145 Keywords: Child PornographyLaw Enforcement InvestigationsMilitary (U.S.)ProstitutionRapeSextingSexual AbuseSexual HarassmentSexual Misconduct |
Author: Cantor, David Title: Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct Summary: Members of the Association of American Universities (AAU) are working to combat sexual assault and misconduct on their campuses. As an association of research universities, AAU decided in 2014 that the best way to help its members address this issue was to develop and implement a scientific survey to better understand the attitudes and experiences of their students with respect to sexual assault and sexual misconduct. The survey's primary goal was to provide participating institutions of higher education (IHEs) with information to inform their policies to prevent and respond to sexual assault and misconduct. In addition, members hoped that the survey would provide useful information to policymakers as well as make a significant contribution to the body of academic research on this complex issue. In the fall of 2014, AAU contracted with Westat, a research firm, to work with a university team of researchers and administrators to design and implement the survey, entitled the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. The survey was administered at the end of the spring 2015 semester on the campuses of 27 IHEs, 26 of which are AAU member universities. This report provides a description of the survey methodology and key results. The survey was designed to assess the incidence, prevalence and characteristics of incidents of sexual assault and misconduct. It also assessed the overall campus climate with respect to perceptions of risk, knowledge of resources available to victims, and perceived reactions to an incident of sexual assault or misconduct. The report provides selected results for five questions: - How extensive is nonconsensual sexual contact? - How extensive is sexual harassment, stalking and intimate partner violence? - Who are the victims? - To whom do students report or talk about the incidents? - What is the campus climate around sexual assault and sexual misconduct? This study is one of the first to provide an empirical assessment of these questions across a wide range of IHEs. Prior studies of campus sexual assault and misconduct have been implemented for a small number of IHEs or for a national sample of students with relatively small samples for any particular IHE. To date, comparisons across surveys have been problematic because of different methodologies and different definitions. The AAU study is one of the first to implement a uniform methodology across multiple IHEs and to produce statistically reliable estimates for each IHE. It was designed to provide separate estimates for incidents involving two types of sexual contact (penetration and sexual touching) and four tactics (physical force, drugs and alcohol, coercion, absence of affirmative consent), as well as behaviors such as sexual harassment, stalking, and intimate partner violence. Providing this level of detail allows campus administrators to tailor policies by these very different types of sexual assault and misconduct. Details: Rockville, MD: Westat, 2015. 288p. Source: Internet Resource: Prepared for: The Association of American Universities: Accessed September 21, 2015 at: https://www.aau.edu/uploadedFiles/AAU_Publications/AAU_Reports/Sexual_Assault_Campus_Survey/Report%20on%20the%20AAU%20Campus%20Climate%20Survey%20on%20Sexual%20Assault%20and%20Sexual%20Misconduct.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.aau.edu/uploadedFiles/AAU_Publications/AAU_Reports/Sexual_Assault_Campus_Survey/Report%20on%20the%20AAU%20Campus%20Climate%20Survey%20on%20Sexual%20Assault%20and%20Sexual%20Misconduct.pdf Shelf Number: 136848 Keywords: Campus CrimesColleges and UniversitiesIntimate Partner ViolenceRapeSexual AssaultsSexual HarassmentSexual MisconductStalking |
Author: U.S. House. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Title: Tables of Penalties: Examining Sexual Misconduct in the Federal Workplace and Lax Federal Responses Summary: Sexual misconduct is a challenge the federal government must aggressively and consistently address to ensure the well-being and safety of its workforce. The vast majority of federal employees do not engage in conduct unbefitting the civil service. However, for those who do engage in sexual misconduct, swift and forceful accountability is warranted and required. In the 114th Congress, the Committee identified examples of this unacceptable behavior including: the solicitation of prostitutes while on official U.S. government business; the sexual harassment of colleagues and interns; and the accessing of pornography during the workday. Because the sexual misconduct and related unacceptable activities continues, a clear, coherent, consistent and forceful federal response is necessary. Accordingly, last year the Committee's majority staff initiated an examination of agency disciplinary policies by reviewing each agency's uniquely constructed "Table of Penalties." The review showed no standardized definition of sexual misconduct and no requirement agencies have standardized recommended penalties. This could lead to inconsistent responses to unlawful or noxious behavior and disparate treatment of the conduct and offenders depending on the agency. The review also found recommended discipline varies within an agency and some agencies lack a Table of Penalties altogether. The federal government must address these inconsistencies to better identify and combat sexual misconduct within the federal workforce. Details: Washington, DC: The Committee, 2017. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Staff Report: Accessed November 13, 2017 at: https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Tables-of-Penalties-Majority-Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Tables-of-Penalties-Majority-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 148144 Keywords: Sexual Harassment Sexual MisconductWorkplace Crime Workplace Misconduct |