Alaska’s AG Gets Slammed for Low Rape Prosecution Rate. You Won’t Believe His Response.

A sexual-assault and domestic-violence victim advocate calls his remarks “insensitive and derogatory.”

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/32005048@N06/3903243359/in/photolist-6WV9gi-7aY5C8-7czutj-7nmFk9-cBRzdQ-cB7FCG-dtKbme-cB7zMb-crsnd5-eqnpHR-cELAi7-cELyLA-cEP7BJ-cCvQcb-8p4zzy-8bZgeg-czAS1h-8fAU4Y-cz5soQ-bwNGpr-cExU5G-cF44pL-8oZQrZ-cB4JzN-hYe2Qr-8CFRdJ-9SzkGQ-cAby3N">Arthur Chapman</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Alaska has the highest per capita rate of reported rapes in the United States, almost three times the national average. Republican Gov. Sean Parnell recently called sexual violence in his state an “epidemic” greater than bear attacks or car accidents. But the number of sexual-assault cases that state prosecutors choose to pursue is low. Only 141 total sexual-assault cases were prosecuted in 2011, according to the latest data. The data doesn’t show how many total sexual assaults were reported that year—but the next year, when the state began tracking these numbers, there were 804 sexual assaults reported to law enforcement. Last month, at a House Finance Committee meeting, Alaska state Rep. Mark Neuman (R-Big Lake) criticized Attorney General Michael Geraghty for the low prosecution rate and for not reporting adequate data on sexual assault. In response to Neuman’s criticism about sexual-assault prosecutions, Geraghty—who was speaking in support of the state’s multiyear initiative to combat domestic violence and sexual assault—blamed victims, particularly those of domestic violence, for refusing to testify (video here at 84:00): 

We have a mandatory arrest statute [for domestic violence] in this state, and so…the officer has to make an arrest. Now, it’s our job to prosecute and get a conviction. I can tell you, many times—and this is the part of the problem—many victims…change their mind. It may have all been, not a prank necessarily, but a vindictive move by the victim to get back at the perpetrator, her husband or significant other, or whatever. There’s a whole gamut of facts that apply in these situations. And it’s my job to get a conviction. If the victim won’t testify and it’s a he-said-she-said, I have to make a decision of where my resources are devoted…the numbers are improving and the rate of [case] acceptance is going up.

In a March 7 letter sent to Geraghty, Peggy Brown, executive director of the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), said that she was “incredibly offended” by the “insensitive and derogatory” comments. “You should…create a climate in which victims have the confidence to step forward and report these crimes; rather than one in which your department dismissively screens out charges, calls victims a ‘part of the problem,’ shames victims and calls them vindictive,” she wrote, noting that, “there are many reasons why victims do not come forward,” including “witness tampering, through coercion” in domestic violence cases.

On Monday, Geraghty sent a letter of apology to Brown, noting, “I acknowledge there are many reasons why victims may not want to proceed with a criminal case…it was wrong for me to have said anything that suggested otherwise.” This isn’t the first time Geraghty’s office has been in hot water over how it handles sexual-assault prosecutions—in 2013, Geraghty acknowledged error in how prosecutors handled the case of a known sex offender, who was charged with killing two people and sexually assaulting a young girl and an elderly woman, hours after he was released from prison. (Later that year, Geraghty put more restrictions on plea deals, a move that was seen as beneficial to victims.) 

This fiscal year, Alaska dedicated about $10.8 million to stopping sexual assault and domestic violence as part of the governor’s “Choose Respect” initiative. But at the hearing, Neuman said the reports coming out of the initiative were lacking data and the numbers weren’t reason to celebrate. “Do I think [with] great enthusiasm that we’re doing a great job? No, I do not,” he said, at one point becoming so impassioned, he said, “I’m trying to calm down here.” Geraghty disagreed with that assessment at the hearing, noting, “We go into great detail” in the report, and that sexual assault prosecutions were on the rise. (Earlier in the hearing, John Skidmore, statewide director of the criminal division at the Department of Law, said that the increase in prosecutions was directly related to an increase in sexual-assault reports.)

Rachel Gernat worked as assistant district attorney in Alaska for 12 years until 2011, focusing almost exclusively on sex crimes, and now sits on the governor’s council on domestic violence and sexual assault. She says during her work, both past and present, she “often enough” sees cases where prosecutors had enough evidence to move forward on a sexual-assault case, but chose not to. She said that in her experience, “prosecutors are stretched thin and given little support. [New prosecutors] are often sent to practice in bush communities where sex crimes are prevalent. Not only do they have no training on the intricacies of prosecuting sex crimes, but have no experience at all in prosecuting cases.” 

Gernat adds that, from what she has seen, “of course [victims] are frustrated. They feel like they went through the exam and told their story only to have the case pled out or dismissed. They feel as if they are not believed. This is probably the largest comment about cases that are not accepted or pled out. Often cases are pled because there is no other extrinsic evidence to support the victim’s statement.?” Brown adds that she sees local prosecutors reject cases for a variety of reasons; for example, “if there is a victim who is under the influence of alcohol, unless it’s the perfect case, [the local defense attorneys] are not prosecuting.” 

Richard Svobodny, the deputy attorney general for the criminal division of the Alaska Department of Law, says, “Each year, all prosecutors attend a three-day mandatory conference where training is given regarding prosecution of domestic violence [and] sexual assault…In addition to this yearly conference, mandatory regional training sessions on [these issues] have been attended by all prosecutors and Alaska state troopers.” He adds, “I want to stress that communications with people who have a concern about prosecutors not adequately pursuing their duties is encouraged! Once someone has given a specific case example, that case is reviewed.” He says he recently reviewed cases in Nome, Alaska [population: 3,757] and “there was no indication that any case was declined because of a ‘blame the victim’ bias on the part of the prosecutor.” 

Geraghty said at the hearing that he knows the work isn’t done yet. “I don’t think I ever characterized this as we’re doing a great job. We have a long way to go. It’s a marathon.” 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate