Sexual Assault Grooming & Our Schools: A case Study

PRESENTED BY DET. DEREK IRVINE& DET. DAVID ELLIOTT

CANON CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT

Sexual Assault Sexual Assault Grooming & Our Grooming & Our

Schools: A Case StudySchools: A Case Study

Goals of the Presentation:

Heighten awareness about teacher sex offenders

Explore investigative techniques/tactics Examine difficulties/barriers in the

investigation Provide insight into one victims behaviors

and “mind set”

STATISTICS:

2004 U.S. DEPT OF EDUCATION STUDY OF 8TH – 11TH GRADE STUDENTS

SAMPLE INCLUDED REPRESENTATIVE SUBPOPULATIONS OF LATINO/A, WHITE AND AFRICAN DESCENT STUDENTS

9.6% OF ALL STUDENTS REPORTED UNWANTED CONTACT AND/OR NONCONTACT EDUCATOR SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

OF STUDENTS WHO EXPERIENCED ANY KIND OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT IN SCHOOLS, 21% WERE TARGETS OF EDUCATORS

When applying the number of students who report educator sexual misconduct to the population of all K-12 students, more than 4.5 million students are subject to sexual misconduct by an employee of a school sometime between kindergarten & 12th grade

Statistics:

•A survey from 1991 from a North Carolina High School revealed that 13 percent of graduates reported they partook in sexual intercourse with a teacher and 14 percent from another NC high school.•Many school districts made confidential agreements with the abusers trading recommendations for resignations.

Statistics:

•In 2003, 159 Washington State coaches were reprimanded over a ten year period and 98 remained employed as coaches and teachers. •Between 1991 and 2000, 290,000 students reported they experienced some type of physical sexual abuse by a member of a public school staff.•A study in New York reported 225 cases of sexual abuse by a teacher and not one was reported to the police and less than 1% lost their teaching licenses.

Statistics:

Excerpt from U.S. Dept of Education, Office of the Under Secretary,Educator Sexual Misconduct: A SynthesisOf Existing Literature, Washington D.C.2004; Carol Shakeshaft

Statistic References:

•Cursory research resulted in 56 known cases in Colorado •Offenders ages ranged from 21 to 72 yoa•Average age 37.7 years old•Unable to verify ages of all victims, many were teenagers•42 male/14 female offenders

Statistics: Colorado Cases





Types of offenses:38 – sexual assault on a child, SAOC position of trust

14 – Internet luring, sexual exploitation, child pornography

4 – other (failure to rpt child use, stalking, incest,tampering w/evid)

Ladies and gentlemen: The story you are about to hear is true. Only the names have been changed to “protect the innocent." – or the guilty.

Teacher Sex Offender:

The Sergeant(Retired)

Duties of a high ranking Sergeants in today's ARMY

Enlisted soldiers who attain the distinction of being selected to be sergeant majors are the epitome of success in their chosen field

There is no greater honor

Carries out policies and standard of performance, training, appearance and conduct of enlisted personnel

Is expected to function completely without supervision

Is generally the key enlisted member of staff elements

Todays Sergeant

DistinctionEpitome of successNo greater honorThey set the StandardThey are the buffers

between Officers and enlisted

To the CO, the sergeant major is the one person close to him, other than his wife

To enlisted men, the sergeant major is a port in a storm, a refuge in time of need

At the time of the investigation “the Sergeant” was 46 years old

Employed as a senior JROTC instructor, High School level

Married, two children, 14 and 1924 years active militaryBeginning his 4th year as a JROTC instructor

August 27

Victim was telling her sister and friend about cheating on her boyfriend with older man – accidental disclosure

Boyfriend is the son of the SergeantOlder man was in this 40’sSister and friend both guessed the older

man was the Sergeant, which Victim affirmsVictim tells them “where they did it (sex)”

August 28

Sister initiates pre-text phone call to victim on her own knowing that victim would deny the relationship if confronted by an adult

Victim relays same information on recording

Sister makes two copies of conversation

August 30, 2nd Day of school

Friend of sister and victim reports incident to Principle, who notifies School Resource Officer

SRO notifies investigationsInterviews of sister, friend, and third friend

scheduled and conducted School wanted to notify parents of all involved

students LE was now involved School was advised none of the students are

suspects, therefore, no parent notifications required


Sister interview Victim relayed she and the Sergeant had sex 2

times in the woods, 2 times in the JROTC classroom storage area

The Sergeant would pick victim up from home in early morning hours, and take her to school for “drill team practice” – they were the only ones present

The Sergeant voluntarily “tutored” victim The Sergeant and Victim spent A LOT of time

together during summer @ school, and at his family’s home


Friend interview Caught Victim in a lie on 27th, and confronted her Victim admitted to having sex with the Sergeant Knew Victim and the Sergeant text messaged each

other frequently


3rd friend Her father is with the Colorado State Patrol 3rd friend advised sister to record conversation

between sister and victim 3rd friend never understood why the Sergeant would

pick up victim from home @ 0500 for drill team meetings in the summer when they were the only two present

Any Obvious RED Flags yet?

“Drill team practice”Voluntarily tutoredTime together during summer @ school,

and at his family’s home Rent & Utilities


Victim interviewVictim had two cell phones on her person – 1 was

hers, other cell belonged to “Anthony” Victim uncooperative during interview

She loved him, felt betrayed by sister and friends Denied any relationship with the Sergeant Finally disclosed sex between herself and the

Sergeant “He will get in trouble for everything”


Victim Interview: Threw her glasses, pulled her hair Admitted to “sexting” on phones Did not want to give password information –

eventually did Passwords were each others first names Victim admitted second phone was given to her by the

Sergeant (HTC Evo 4G) After interview – suicide precautions

It was also learned that the Sergeant was paying the victim’s family’s utility bills


School District Principle and Superintendant initiated suspension

of the Sergeant -prior to end of day Advised in suspension letter that “police

recommended” suspending the Sergeant with pay pending investigation

Advised according to a new state law, parents, staff, and students be notified

An interview was scheduled with the Sergeant at 0900 the next day with Police


Prior to leaving school Principle and District staff enquired about a suicide

watch for the Sergeant the Sergeant never exhibited signs of self harm

“Yes sir – No sir” throughout entire contact Search of JROTC storage areas conducted, nothing

located


2100hrs the Sergeant son texts victim’s phone

“Have you seen my dad?” Welfare/ATL bolo sent out to surrounding agencies

August 31, 3rd Day of School

the Sergeant’s Interview: the Sergeant fails to show at 0900hrs Time was given for him to contact us Contacted the Sergeants Wife

the Sergeant never came home yesterday the Sergeant has PTSD All calls go direct to voicemail Did not seem concerned as the Sergeant sometimes does

this when he is stressed Wife never asked about why the Sergeant had an

interview LE 2nd Welfare/ATL bolo aired

August 31, 3rd Day of school

Arrest warrant issued for the Sergeant – School notified

School immediately issues parent notification “Warrant issued for the Sergeant , sexual assault,

charges have been filed” “Has been arrested”

September 1, 4th Day of school

Media Firestorm erupts Facebook explodes with support for the Sergeant , damns

the alleged accuser

3 search warrant applications submitted for: Phone contents (Phone given to Victim by the

Sergeant) Subscriber information for above phone Phone contents for Victims phone

Mother had given prior consent


Colorado Turkey season started Sept 1 1300hrs Hunter finds red vehicle with deceased

male inside while hunting Location inside Fremont County, secluded area in

canyon Detectives and FCSO respond Locate red vehicle – engine still running


During the interview, Jennie admitted to having a substance abuse problem

Also admitted knowing victims, but denied any wrongdoing

She stated that the victims were her babysitters

All she had done was try to help the boys and be a “mentor” to them


the Sergeant identified as deceased in vehicle

Advanced stages of decomposition Body was bloated, dense fly population Excessive heat inside vehicle Estimated at 2 days (August 30?)

Evidence recovered: Suicide note, cell phone receipt (HTC Evo 4G), cell

phone booklets

Cell Phone Contents:Victim Phone (Cell #1)

14 photos of the Sergeant , 10 of which the Sergeant is exposing his penis

1 “Teen Pregnancy facts” PDF NO text messages between the Sergeant/Victim Calendar entries

July 6 sex with SGM July 13sex with SGM July 27sex with SGM Aug 8 sex with SGM Aug 24 sex with SGM

Cell Phone Contents:Cell # 2

From evidence located in car: the Sergeant purchased phone August 3 Credit card Subscriber info:

the Sergeant, gives School address Phonebook lists only 2 people

“Alfred” as the owner “Ashlee”


Text Messages: the Sergeant “If I only had practice longer I could have

given u a kiss” Vic “I know but its ok” the Sergeant “I hope so cant wait to kiss your sexy lips” Vic “when would u like too?”


Text Messages: the Sergeant “had a nice dream about you last night. I

was kissing you neck, caressing your ass, kissing your lips. Sucking on your tits”

Vic “Mmmmm ‘)” the Sergeant “then you had me put my cock between

your tits and you stroked him until he came” Vic “”

More of the same


Text Messages: Vic “I love u SGM!!!” Vic “I hope saying SGM doesn’t creep you out”

.

“Ashlee” and the victim had the exact same cell phone number

Calendar entries July 6 sex with (victim) July 13 sex with (victim) July 27 sex with (victim) Aug 8 sex with (victim) Aug 24 sex with (victim) All calendar dates were set as REOCCURING

18 incoming phone calls from Victim Utilizing her the victims real name, 1 using

“Ashlee”122 outgoing calls to victim14 missed calls from victim

the Sergeant’s personal cell phone, recovered from vehicle August 30 - unsent texts to immediate family

“Please remember the good in me “I love you, please forgive me” “I always loved you, forgive me”

Several incoming texts from family Last text from son “Daddy please come home we miss u soo much we want

you home we can get thru this dad please come home dad please”

Investigative Tactics/Techniques:Minimal & direct efforts to obtain info

about suspect from witnesses/victimsAvoid alarming/tipping off suspect (the

Sergeant was never directly told what the interview was about – just allegations of possible abuse by a student, sex was never mentioned)

Pre-text phone calls (gains truthful & relevant info from suspect and/or victim)

Investigative Tactics/Techniques:Obtain as much info about suspect and

victim as possible from friends/witnesses Judicious use of search warrants even if

you never get to serve themPAY ATTENTION TO DETAIL

It was blind luck that the victim brought the second cell phone in that belonged to “Anthony”

“Anthony” is the Sergeant’s middle name

Barriers/Difficulties Encountered:No interview with suspect was ever obtainedUncooperative victim interview, at times

Reid was usedSchool officials wanted updates as they

happened, play by playNew law mandated school release arrest

information within 24 hours and notify staff, parents, students, and past students

Outcry of support for the Sergeant from other students, school staff, parents, and family via Facebook

Media coverage/hype (one TV station reported the Sergeant’s suicide was GSW)

Labor/time intensive (60hours in 4 days)Victim did not consider themselves as a

victimStudents at school threatened victim via

facebookthe Sergeant’s family/former soldiers “there

is no way in hell he did this”

Commonalities:

•Selective with victims•Access/time alone with victims•Use of technology to groom•Staff, student suspicions•Administration/ colleague failure to respond/ report•Use of authority, retaliation, getting offender “in trouble”

Commonalities:

•Secrecy & dishonesty•Continually tests boundaries•Grooming is well-organized; long or short term•Accomplished at presenting a “respectable” façade•Highly manipulative to victims, family, friends, co-workers, supervisors, etc•Generally personable; seeks to “befriend” those around them

For more information:

Detective Derek IrvineCanon City Police Dept161 Justice Center RoadCanon City, CO 81212

(719) [email protected]

For more information:

Detective David ElliottCanon City Police Dept161 Justice Center RoadCanon City, CO 81212

(719) [email protected]