A thirteen-year old girl awoke to find her hands tied behind her back and thirty year-old Glennell Blake on top of her, warning not to tell anyone about what was going to happen. Mr. Blake had known his victim since she was seven years old, and the prosecutor would later allege that he knew the girl was a mentally handicapped before he raped her. Immediately after the attack, she told an adult who was staying at the house that the defendant was "messing with me." The adult advised the girl to tell the defendant to stop.
The girl returned to her room and Mr. Blake repeated his assault. The girl again told the adult, who now asked her if the defendant had sex with her. The girl replied that he did not. Her mother would later testify that her daughter's learning disability affected her ability to articulate her feelings.
One month later, the girl told a family friend about the assault. The friend told the girl's mother, who brought her to the hospital for an examination. The physician determined she had been sexually assaulted. Mr. Blake was charged with aggravated criminal sexual assault and unlawful restraint. The State alleged that Mr. Blake was aware the victim could not understand the nature of the act and therefore the girl did not give knowing consent.
Mr. Blake was convicted. On appeal, he argued, among other things, that the prosecutor presented insufficient evidence as to the victim's capability to understand the nature of the act and her capability to give knowing consent. In support of this argument, Mr. Blake pointed out that the girl was mentally aware enough to protest the attacks and used anatomically correct terms.
Holding: Mr. Blake's conviction was upheld. The court noted that "mere evidence the victim understood the physical nature of sexual relations is not sufficient to establish that the victim comprehended the social and personal costs involved." The court emphasized that the victim's learning disability was a determinative factor in its conclusion that she was unable to understand or give consent to intercourse with Mr. Blake.
| Ann Burgess, D.N.Sc. Psychiatric Nurse The Forensic Panel |
Dr. Burgess Comments: The young adolescent was bound, forced to have sex, and warned to remain silent by a person who had known her since she was a young child. She understood what he has done is wrong, and she disclosed to a houseguest who tells her to protest to the perpetrator. In essence, she was told she to take care of the assault herself; there is no protection from adults. By insisting the girl assume the responsibility for self-defense, the houseguest negated her own accountability and responsibility as an adult. Subsequently she was again assaulted; she again told the houseguest, who now questioned whether or not she had sex with the defendant. Such a question implied in the girl's mind that it was sex, and that she was responsible and participated in it.
The victim's negative reply called into question 1) whether she understood what sex meant, 2) whether she was frightened and confused since the house guest already made her responsible for the defendant's actions, 3) whether she was able to differentiate consent (sex) from force (rape). The physician's examination, one month later, determined the girl had been sexually assaulted.
The above scenario in no way indicated consent. The girl was restrained, penetrated and threatened to remain silent. The first person she told of the assault abdicated the role of protector; even the defendant later acknowledged that the girl protested the attack. This type of assault is classified as a Subordinate Rape, in which the relationship between victim and offender is one of status imbalance and the offender has power over the victim. The relationship status is used to take advantage of the victim. There is callous indifference to the victim; sick, disabled, or otherwise handicapped children are vulnerable to this type of rape (See Douglas JE, Burgess AW, Burgess AG and Ressler, Crime Classification Manual 1992).
This girl protested the assault and sought an adult for assistance, even though she had a cognitive handicap. Such victims respond to threats both implicitly and explicitly. The explicit threat of the defendant didn't dissuade the victim, but the implied threat of the houseguest did detour her and she had to seek another adult, this time a family friend, who assumed the role of adult protector.
We have found that, despite a mental handicap, mental illness, cognitive or sensory deficit, victims are able to recognize and acknowledge they have been assaulted and did not consent. For example, in the infamous Glen Ridge, New Jersey case, the 17-year old mentally retarded adolescent's desire to have a friendship with the high school youths overrode her distress of what they were doing to her in a basement room with a broom, baseball bat and stick. The lawyers for the defendants translated this misguided desire into consent. However, after the assault she immediately attempted to protest to a friend. Her clinical symptoms of decreased appetite, crying spells, dreams about the assault, difficulty concentrating and conducting her work indicated she did not want to be raped by the foreign objects.
Coercive sex may be viewed as acquiescence in that the victim acquiesces to the will of the other in order not to lose a critical resource of the relationship and whatever they perceive that relationship to offer, such as sustenance, affection, friendship or even companionship. The assault must be understood within its context, the response of adults to the disclosure, and the victim's perception of his or her relationship to the offender. With careful interviewing, even in cases where there appears to be acquiescence to the acts, the victims usually show their protest, if not through words, then through behavior and other clinical symptoms of the abuse.
