Date

8-20-2026

Department

Helms School of Government

Degree

Doctor of Criminal Justice (DCJ)

Chair

Latreace N Flynt

Keywords

Adult sexual assault, Sexual assault investigations, sexual assault case processing, implicit bias, rape myths, victim credibility, trauma-informed investigations, victim-centered practices, prosecutorial decision-making, investigative decision-making, sexual assault case attrition, criminal justice policy, policy analysis, law enforcement discretion, downstream orientation, bias-risk indicators, credibility assessments in sexual assault cases, bias in adult sexual assault investigations, Harris county sexual assault response

Disciplines

Law

Abstract

Adult sexual assault cases frequently experience attrition during investigation and prosecution, raising concerns about how implicit bias, rape myths, victim credibility assessments, and anticipated case viability may influence decision-making. This qualitative document-based capstone examined how investigative, prosecutorial, and policy documents reflect these bias-risk factors and whether agency policies contain safeguards that support trauma-informed, victim-centered, and evidence-based case processing. The original design anticipated reviewing de-identified case-level records from the Houston Police Department, Harris County Sheriff’s Office, and Harris County District Attorney’s Office. Because those records were not available within the project timeline, the study proceeded as a focused policy audit of available agency policies, procedures, manuals, public reports, and related institutional documents. The Policy Bias-Risk Audit Tool served as the primary analytic instrument, supplemented by cross-agency comparison and public contextual data. Findings showed that the reviewed documents contained important strengths, including victim-centered language, evidence-collection procedures, specialized investigative structures, fairness-oriented prosecutorial principles, and supervisory review mechanisms. However, written guidance did not consistently explain how personnel should evaluate delayed reporting, intoxication, lack of visible injury, prior relationships, fragmented memory, continued contact, victim reluctance, demeanor, or anticipated jury skepticism without relying on unsupported credibility assumptions. The findings do not establish that bias occurred in any individual case. Rather, they identify policy omissions and discretionary gaps that may create bias-related risks. The study proposes the Adult Sexual Assault Bias-Risk Review and Documentation Framework to strengthen neutral documentation, evidence-based reasoning, supervisory review, prosecutorial screening, transparency, and accountability in adult sexual assault case processing.

Download

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS