Episode Transcript
[00:00:04] Mariska Hargitay: Welcome. I'm Mariska Hargitay, and this is Survivor Stories, a podcast of the Joyful Heart Foundation, which I started more than 20 years ago to transform society's response to sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse. Thank you for joining us today. Survivor Stories introduces you to some of the remarkable people that we at the Foundation have met over the years. Through interviews with host and longtime board member Debbie Millman, you will hear from these people, some of whom have survived profoundly difficult, painful experiences of violence and gone on to change the world. I hope you find their stories as inspiring and enlightening and motivating as I do.
[00:00:56] Debbie Millman: Please note that this episode contains depictions of sexual abuse and other violence. Please take care of yourself and go to our website, joyfulheartfoundation.org to find resources and hotlines if needed.
[00:01:14] Donna Palomba: The statute had run out six years earlier and there was absolutely nothing that could be done. I mean, we had irrefutable DNA evidence. It was definitive, and it made no sense to have a statute of limitations.
[00:01:28] Jennifer Long: When you think of some other violent crimes for which statutes of limitations may be longer or may not exist at all, the only thing that separates them from a crime of sexual violence is that we still approach these cases almost from a place of trying to disprove them, rather than listening to the evidence and taking it where it leads us.
[00:01:53] Debbie Millman: Welcome to Survivor Stories, a podcast of the Joyful Heart Foundation, where we meet the people who are helping to reshape society's approach to domestic violence, sexual assault and child abuse. I'm your host, Debbie Millman, and I'm also a longtime board member of Joyful Heart, working alongside our fearless founder, Mariska Hargitay. In this episode, we are going to focus on an issue that affects countless survivors of sexual assault. The statute of limitations. The statute of limitations is the legal time limit within which a crime can be prosecuted. When that time period ends, offenders can't be charged with their crimes or brought to trial. Statutes of limitations vary depending on the crime and the location where the crime occurred. Statutes of limitations exist in order to ensure evidence and witnesses are reliable over time, and to give defendants closure. However, in cases of sexual assault, the statute of limitations can hinder the pursuit of justice. This is because it can take many, many years for victims to process their trauma and come forward with their experiences. In addition, it could be many years before new but crucial evidence emerges, such as DNA evidence that can prove decisive in bringing charges to perpetrators. In this episode of Survivor Stories, we're going to speak with two guests to explore how statutes of limitations impact survivors of sexual violence and their pursuit of justice. First, I'm going to talk with Donna Palomba, a survivor who founded Jane Doe No More, a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting survivors like herself. Then I'm going to talk with Jennifer Long, the CEO of Equitas, a nonprofit organization that supports prosecutors and justice professionals in their effort to hold perpetrators of gender-based violence and human trafficking accountable for their crimes. Donna Palomba, thank you for joining us today, and thank you for your courage and advocacy for and with survivors.
[00:04:13] Donna Palomba: Thank you so much for having me, Debbie. It's a pleasure.
[00:04:16] Debbie Millman: Donna, if it's okay with you, can we go back to September 1993, in Connecticut when in your home with your two sleeping children, you were assaulted by a masked intruder?
[00:04:30] Donna Palomba: Sure.
[00:04:31] Debbie Millman: Can you tell us a little bit more about what happened?
[00:04:34] Donna Palomba: Yes. At that time, my husband and I were married for 12 years, and I was a partner in a marketing firm. My husband was busy in the insurance business with his three brothers, and he was away for the very first time in our marriage. It was a Friday night, and I had put the children to bed and I had gone to bed myself probably around 10:00. I was sound asleep when I heard footsteps. And I immediately became alarmed because they didn't sound like little children's bare feet. I was sleeping on my stomach in our bedroom, and I remember looking up and seeing a shadowy figure, someone wearing some type of mask. And I really had little time to do much. I screamed, he covered my mouth with his gloved hand and I was quickly overcome. I was restrained with ties. The perpetrator had a gun and a knife. He cut my clothing, raped me, put a gun to my head. I felt like my head was on fire and imagined my children finding me there the next morning. I did not think I was going to survive. And I said out loud, God, please absolve me of all my sins, and I waited. He said, if you call the pigs, his words, I'm going to come back and kill you.
[00:05:55] Donna Palomba: And that's actually when I thought that he may let me live, and I tried to say anything I could to convince him to leave. And I said, this is between you and I. I could never identify you. I'll never tell a soul. And miraculously, I heard him walk down those stairs, and I heard him shut the door behind me. And at that point I was bound, and I was disoriented on the bed. And of course, my first thoughts were of my children. I could not get to them fast enough. I was able to wriggle free from the ties, and I ran down the hall to my son's room, and he was sleeping, and I ran to my daughter's room, and she was untouched, and I just knelt down and sobbed. And honestly, Debbie, at that moment, I felt gratitude because I knew that if I had survived and they were untouched, that we would be okay. It was like a miracle to me that I had survived and that they were just lying there untouched. And so, you know, I went from unbelievable terror to survival instinct to immense gratitude. Truly. And Yeah, that's where my story begins.
[00:07:06] Debbie Millman: Now, I believe that you ran outside to a neighbor, and the neighbor called the police, and the police came with a whole lot of entourage. Can you talk a little bit about what happened and how they responded to your assault and how they made you feel?
[00:07:30] Donna Palomba: So I wanted to get help immediately. And I picked up the phone line and it was dead. We had two landlines. They were both dead. And it was then that I realized the perpetrator must have cut the line. So I ran to a neighbor. He took one look at me and picked up the phone and dialed 911, and police arrived on the scene shortly thereafter. I was left at the neighbor's house, which was about five homes away. I was told to wait for a police officer who never came, and so I ended up running back up the street with a knife that I found in the kitchen drawer from my neighbor. At that point, the family members were arriving, officers were arriving, and my concerns remained about my children. I wanted them to be sure that they were safe and not frightened, and they remained asleep. Unfortunately, you know, people were walking up and down the stairs, free entry into the rooms. So the crime scene was compromised, and it wasn't something that I was even thinking about at the time. I did go to the hospital. A sex crimes kit was conducted, DNA from the perpetrator was found, lacerations were noted on my wrist and my eye was throbbing horribly, and it turned out I had a scratched cornea on my right eye. So my eye was patched, and then I went to my mother in law's where the children were, and we had to break the news to my husband the next day, which was very difficult.
[00:09:00] Donna Palomba: His brothers were there with me, and we told him as best we could, and he was devastated. But I assured him that the children were untouched and that I was going to be okay. And honestly, I was well on my way to healing. I loved my job, my career, my family was so supportive and wonderful. I have a strong faith and I was back to work within a couple of days. My husband and I actually met with the lieutenant that was in charge of my case, gave him all the information that we could. Of course, I was, you know, obviously at a disadvantage being bound. So I couldn't see too much. But I did remember certain things. When he covered my mouth after I screamed, he was wearing a glove. I relayed that. When he was on the, he smelled like grease or oil, and I relayed that, And I was well on my way to healing when one month after the crime, the lieutenant put me in a small interrogation room and it was just he and I, and it was a small desk. He turned on a tape recorder and pulled out a little white piece of paper and began reading me my Miranda rights. I was confused at that point, and I just said, what? What? What's going on? And he said, why don't you tell me what really happened that night? And I didn't understand where he was coming from.
[00:10:24] Donna Palomba: I said, I've done nothing but tell the truth. And of course, had I known then what I know now, I would never have sat there and taken it. But I did for an hour, and he abused me in the most damaging way when I was most vulnerable. I was revictimized. And he told me that I had everything to lose if I didn't come forward. And he said, my children, my husband, my career, my reputation, he threatened me with everything that I held dear. And I tried to reason with him. He kept saying, we have countless interviews and photographs, so you may as well just tell me. I said, please show me the interviews and photographs. I can explain anything, and all to no avail. He said, no, you can't do that. I can't show you that. It's an ongoing investigation. At one point I was just in shock and sobbing, and I said to him, what could you be thinking of doing this to me? And he looked at his watch and he said, I'm thinking about what I'm going to have for lunch. And honestly, I felt worse then than I did the night of the crime.
[00:11:34] Debbie Millman: What on earth gave them the sense that this was acceptable?
[00:11:40] Donna Palomba: Well, he thought I was lying, and we would find out through depositions, the reason why he behaved this way was because someone in the community who had given information to police before went to him and said, I have some information about the case. You know, I heard you may be having an affair and that she concocted this rape to cover up an affair. And then he said, I have no idea if this is true or not, but I just thought I'd I'd share that with you. So this lieutenant who didn't know me, and rather than talk to anyone who did know me, talk to my business partners, talk to any friends of mine, talk to my family members, follow me around, for that matter, and see how I live my life, because this was a vicious and completely false lie, he chose to break me. And so he almost did. And when I sat there, I didn't know what to do. And he said, I'll tell you what. I will allow you to leave. But you come back here this afternoon. You tell me what really happened. This tape goes in the drawer and I close the case. Or I will find you, I will arrest you, and your picture will be in tomorrow's paper. Because I have 27 cases on my desk. And one way or another, this case is getting closed today.
[00:13:11] Debbie Millman: I can't even imagine how horrendous you must have felt. How revictimized by this. What was the impact of that second trauma on you? And how did you manage the emotional toll of being questioned and not believed?
[00:13:39] Donna Palomba: It was surreal, honestly, Debbie. I could even remember, it was an October day and I had a trench coat on. It was slightly cool. I made it to my parents' house, but I couldn't physically take the trench coat off. I was just like a zombie because nothing made sense anymore. I mean, it was like we were thrown into a world that we didn't know how to navigate. My husband and my father went down and demanded to talk to that lieutenant after knowing what happened to me, and they weren't even given a room in which to speak. In the middle of a busy hallway, my father and my husband were told that her story was full of holes, and yes, there was a threat of her arrest. So they came back in disbelief and my husband actually asked me, he said, Donna, is there anything that you have to tell me? And I said, absolutely not. And that was all he needed to hear. And so thankfully, we have a strong marriage and we have a wonderful family. And I'm telling you, I don't know how I could have gotten through it if I didn't have a support system. And so we chose to fight. I mean, we had no choice. No one was looking for the armed masked perpetrator who was out in our community. They had a magnifying glass on me, and I had done nothing but tell the truth. So something was terribly wrong. And we got legal help, and we demanded that an Internal Affairs investigation be conducted.
[00:15:11] Donna Palomba: We waited for a year to find out that this investigation came back, that actually complimented the officers that were involved with this on a thorough investigation. And the technique that he used by revictimizing me was proper, given the situation. The only thing he was reprimanded for is that he put the tape recorder to the wrong switch, apparently, and he wasn't able to produce a working copy of the tape. And that was like a gut punch. It's like after all of this time. So, you know, at that point, I was getting stronger. I was learning more about these crimes because honestly, I never even used the word rape until it happened to me. It's an ugly topic, and it's not often talked about. And I learned that most victims are under the age of 21. That 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys will be sexually assaulted by the time they are 18 years old. And I kept thinking, my goodness, if this happened to me and I didn't have the support that I have, what could happen? We knew we had to do more to fight this. And so we filed a civil suit against the city of Waterbury, Connecticut. During that time, I learned more about these crimes. I reached out to the people that I knew and others that I didn't. I reached out to Doctor Henry Lee. He resampled the DNA in my case because I didn't trust what the police had. As we were awaiting trial, I made a list of things that I felt needed to be changed as it relates to how victims are treated, specifically victims of sexual crimes.
[00:16:58] Donna Palomba: And at the very top of the list is that every victim should be treated with dignity and respect. And it took seven years to go to trial. They did not think I would persevere. Finally, in 2000, we were told that the trial would begin in January 2001. A couple of weeks before trial, I was diagnosed with breast cancer and it was stage one breast cancer. At that point. I was like a steamroller who could not be stopped. I had prepared so diligently for this trial that we made a careful decision with my doctors that it would be better for me, both mentally and physically, to go through the trial and then have a lumpectomy and radiation therapy, and that's what happened. So the trial began in early January 2001. It lasted a month and it was absolutely brutal. There were two female defense attorneys that tried to discredit me. They belittled me and it was just awful. I remember one officer that was on the scene that night, put in a report to the lieutenant that I was wearing the nylons that were on my neck and wrist, as if they were a stage prop. On a 911 call from the neighbor's home we have that recorded and it's public record, you can hear the officer telling me, okay, it's very important. Do not wash. Do not remove anything. And so I was simply obeying orders and they just tried to discredit me.
[00:18:41] Donna Palomba: One of the other things that the female defense attorneys were talking about is that I use the word gentleman on the 911 call, and that was a big red flag. Now, honestly, I was in a state of shock just trying to get information out to the officer that was on the phone. And I'm a business person, and that's how I spoke, and those are the words I used. I couldn't tell you what I was saying. I just wanted to get information to him. And I was mostly worried about my children. But then Doctor Henry Lee took the stand and he testified about the proper handling of a crime scene, how the entire perimeter of the home should have been cordoned off, how forensics should have been called in and fingerprints taken, none of which was done. And Doctor David Johnson testified. I had sought help from him, and he specializes in post-traumatic stress disorder, and he said that I was strong and I was well on my way to healing when this second attack at a police station by the lieutenant in charge of my case was in many ways more damaging than the rape itself. And then Neil O'Leary, who had come up through the ranks and was now chief of police or deputy chief, I'm not quite certain, took the stand and he dared to go against his fellow officers. And he said there wasn't one shred of evidence to prove that I had done anything but tell the truth, and finally these officers were found negligent.
[00:20:12] Debbie Millman: Justice. Justice was served. In 2004, 11 years after the assault, your attacker attacked another woman who lived near where you used to live when you were attacked. Police were then able to identify your attacker using DNA evidence. What happened after that identification was made?
[00:20:45] Donna Palomba: My husband and I were called down to the police department by Chief Neil O'Leary, and I will never forget that day. The chief said we have a hit, we have a DNA match, and the perpetrator is John Regan. And I saw the colour drain from my husband's face. John Regan was a man leading a double life who was thought to be a happily married, churchgoing father of three who had grown up with my husband since kindergarten. They played football together in high school. They were good friends and we had gone to each other's weddings and it was just devastating. The betrayal was incredible and unfortunately, because of a statute of limitations that had run out six years earlier, we were told he could not be arrested for the crime of rape in that case. In our case. And the only thing we could they could arrest him on, which had no statute, was kidnapping. And that's what happened.
[00:21:46] Debbie Millman: You know, it's so interesting. When I was reading about your case, I was really struck by the fact that this happened to you on the one night in 12 years, your husband was gone. And I immediately thought it had to be somebody that knew her husband was leaving. What did you do next?
[00:22:06] Donna Palomba: Well, he was out on bond and living in our community for one year. For one year, while we awaited trial. I did not know he would come back after me and and kill me as he had threatened to do, or if my husband would find him and do something to him. As you can imagine, the emotions were very, very high. And so it was a very trying time. Unfortunately, he actually crossed state lines and sought his next victim. He went to New York State and he waited in Saratoga Springs High School parking lot for a track star. Lindsay is her name and she was leaving track practice, and his car, his van was parked very close to her car. She had to kind of shimmy to get to her driver's door. He opened his van door and grabbed her around the torso in the mouth and tried to pull her into his van. Thankfully, Lindsay was strong and she was able to break free and she screamed and he just said, shut up! And he got back in the van and a coach that heard her cries came to her aid. Another coach jumped in the car. By this time, John Regan was driving on the streets of Saratoga. Thankfully, the coach caught up with him. Law enforcement came. The van, the back seat had been pulled out. There was a tarp, a noose, a syringe, a sedative. Pictures of women he had been stalking in New York and Connecticut. Pictures of the 21-year-old he had attacked in 2004, in Connecticut. A picture of me, $2,500 in cash. That is what it took to finally put John Regan behind bars.
[00:24:02] Debbie Millman: Now, at that point, there was a five-year statute of limitations for sexual assault charges. For kidnapping, there is no statute of limitations.
[00:24:11] Donna Palomba: That's correct.
[00:24:12] Debbie Millman: Can you talk a little bit about how the statute of limitations impacted your ability to seek legal recourse?
[00:24:20] Donna Palomba: The statute had run out six years earlier, and there was absolutely nothing that could be done to hold John Regan, you know, under any other charges other than kidnapping, and it did not make sense to me at all. I mean, we had irrefutable DNA evidence. This is not a he said, she said, and this is not someone that we had identified from a lineup. He would have been the last person that we would ever think could do this. It was the shocking reality, and it was definitive, and it made no sense to have a statute of limitations.
[00:24:55] Debbie Millman: So you began efforts to change the statute of limitations in Connecticut. It resulted in actually being successful. You were able to change the statute of limitations, which has been and will continue to be life-changing for so many survivors. What did the law stipulate before your advocacy efforts? And can you talk about how you were able to change it?
[00:25:23] Donna Palomba: So in 2007, by this time I had learned an awful lot and I had spoken with people that were experts in the field of sexual crimes, and I advocated in Hartford to legislators and explained to them that our laws were written before the science of DNA had evolved to where it had, and it made absolutely no sense to have a statute of limitations when there is DNA evidence in a case like mine. And the governor was supportive of this. She put forth a bill, and at the time it was Governor Jodi Rell. And in the summer of 2007, she came to the police department, that very building where I was revictimized and with me by her side, signed into law the removal of the statute of limitations on sexual crimes with DNA evidence in the state of Connecticut. And that was a win, like you said, for victims going forward from 2007 on, they no longer have that hurdle. And unfortunately it was not retroactive, so nothing could be done about my case.
[00:26:36] Debbie Millman: You advocated for a bill that eliminated the statute of limitations on several types of sexual assault charges, as long as the perpetrator is identified by DNA evidence. How difficult was it to advocate for a bill to eliminate the statute of limitations when they existed for as far back as anybody could remember?
[00:27:03] Donna Palomba: It wasn't difficult because it made so much sense. It was just pure logic. And I just had to help these legislators understand that. And I think once they did, and then we had the support of the governor, you know, I still cannot believe to this day that there are states that still have a statute of limitations, even with DNA. It truly, it defies logic.
[00:27:28] Debbie Millman: Eliminating the statute of limitations empowers more survivors to come forward and seek justice. And so you're really making the world a much safer place by having made this, this important change. I also want to talk about the work of your organization, Jane Doe No More. Can you talk about what you do and how you do it?
[00:27:52] Donna Palomba: Sure. So in 2007, that same year, that the removal of the statute of limitations with DNA occurred, I founded the nonprofit Jane Doe No More. And it's an interesting name. I was Jane Doe in newspaper reports and medical documents. And then the no more, if you look at the logo, even Jane Doe is in like a typewriter type, and then no more is in in my handwriting, actually. And it's to state that, you know, every victim of a sexual crime is a person. A person with an identity, with a name and a face and a family and dreams. And they do not need to hide, that they have done nothing wrong. They should not bear the blame and the shame and the guilt, and that's often what is heaped on them because of our societal stigmas about sexual crimes. And so when I first started the organization, I met with the best and brightest business people that I knew. We formed a board. We set out to improve the way society responds to victims of sexual crimes. And we faced a lot of hurdles, of course, but I came forward as a survivor. And because I've been so open about sharing my story, other survivors came forward and I never, ever realized the magnitude until I was in this position 17 years ago now, survivors that were ready, said, I want to use my voice. What can we do? And so we formed a program called Survivor Speak, and 60 people have now gone through our program, both women and men, because we also know that men can be victims of rape. And there's also another layer of difficulty for men to report.
[00:29:44] Donna Palomba: And so we just want to let everyone know that we bear no shame and that the perpetrators should be held accountable and that we can find a path forward, but we can't do it alone. We need help from others to help everyone understand about these crimes because they take an emotional toll. They take a physical toll, and they're lifelong. There's triggers, that we are victims of trauma, and if we are treated with respect and dignity, we can go on to a path to healing much quicker, and we want to be able to do that for others. And so our Survivors Speak team is all about finding their voice, and we work with professional coaches who help them to articulate their story, and then we talk about our experience. We're in schools and in age-appropriate language and in community centers and everywhere, really talking about these crimes to make this topic approachable, to help others, to understand that this is something they do need to learn about. There's no such thing as not in my neighborhood. It is happening everywhere and it is happening to someone they love and they just don't know it yet. So it's difficult to often get into some places to speak, businesses, what have you. But once we do and we can tell our story, I think we make in most cases, an emotional connection and people realize that this could happen to me. This could happen to my mother, my sister, my brother, and how would I want them to be treated? You know, the world is not getting any safer. We need to help one another to be able to live safely. And if something bad does occur, to be there for them to support them.
[00:31:38] Donna Palomba: So, you know, that's one of our programs is Survivors Speak. And I mentioned in the schools we have our safe student initiative where in age-appropriate language, we start in the middle school talking about healthy relationships, you know, even with a friend. If something doesn't feel right, if some if you're feeling like, you know, uncomfortable in a situation, to trust their gut, to give these kids the confidence that they need to be able to speak up and tell someone. And if that person doesn't listen or doesn't believe you, keep telling a trusted adult because someone will believe you and help you. And we offer self-defense classes for women and girls. Over 6000 women and girls ages 12 and older have gone through the program, through the class since 2009, when we began it. And of course, especially for me, law enforcement and first responders are a particularly important audience. And it's so important to have first responders understand what trauma is, how it could present itself. They talked about the fact that I appeared too calm. I wasn't screaming and hysterical. My kids were upstairs. I was trying to hold it together. And, you know, I was in a state of shock. I couldn't even tell you what I was saying or doing at that point. And so, you know, to support survivors when they come to you in that vulnerable state, to be there for them. And, you know, in that moment everything matters. The way you look at them, the way you speak to them, your tone of voice, your body language, everything matters and it makes such a difference.
[00:33:22] Debbie Millman: How can we better support survivors when it comes to being believed? What are some of the best practices you've encountered now in your work to best support survivors in those moments?
[00:33:43] Donna Palomba: I think the most important thing, if someone discloses to you, is to tell them that you are there for them. Make sure that they're safe. Ask them, what can I do for you right now? I will be with you every step of the way. You want to, of course, encourage them to report, but it's got to be their choice. They may not be ready, and that's okay. And we want to let everyone know that in most states and in Connecticut, you can go to a hospital and have a sex crimes forensic exam done. And you do not have to make the decision to report right then, because we know how difficult that can be. And there's a five-year window. And of course it varies by state. But in Connecticut there's a five-year window where that kit will just be anonymous and it will remain intact. And then if the victim chooses to report during that five-year period, they will test the kit and the police will then investigate the case. And like we talked about earlier, Debbie, the core perpetrators, the ones like a John Regan repeat. And so it's just so important that we encourage and empower survivors to come forward because it could prevent someone else from becoming a victim. And I use the words victim and survivor interchangeably. I feel like I was a victim the night of the crime. I was a victim when Lieutenant Moran interrogated me. But I grew to become a survivor. And everyone should be able to grow, to become a survivor and be put on a path to healing with the support of others.
[00:35:33] Debbie Millman: Don, I have one last question for you. Do you ever envision a time where any statute of limitations for victims of sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse will be eliminated?
[00:35:47] Donna Palomba: I would like to think there will be a time with more understanding, and we at Jane Doe no more have taken the stance that there should be no statute of limitations, with or without DNA evidence. Most of the 60 survivors that are on our survivor speak team are victims of child sexual abuse that happened when they were three, four, five years old. And it often lasted for years. They didn't know it. How would you know any better? Right? I mean, they would think that this is normal. This is what families do. This is what uncles do or whoever. And it's not until sometimes decades later that they're triggered or they have a flashback. And oh my gosh, it can be so devastating. And they feel like they're all alone and there's nothing that they can do. And so it's so important, I think, for all of us as a whole, as a human being, to be able to do something about this. And one way is to give these victims, no matter what age, an opportunity to seek justice. Of course, you still have to prove it. It's not like, you know, you come forward and say, he did this. And it's like, okay, let me go get him. No, you have to look at the evidence. But at least there's an opportunity because chances are that perpetrator has perpetrated again.
[00:37:10] Debbie Millman: I really do hope we can impact the statute of limitations to be able to support all survivors at any age. Everywhere. Donna, where can people find you?
[00:37:22] Donna Palomba: We have a website. It is called JaneDoeNoMore.Org and we have a closed Facebook group for survivors of sexual crimes. And it's for any type of survivor. Men or women. Child sexual abuse, sexual assault, rape. It's a place of no judgment where survivors can go to seek guidance or get inspiration, or share what works for them, whether it be exercise or diet, or just to be there for someone else and give support. And it is growing, and we welcome anyone who is a survivor of a sexual crime to join our group.
[00:38:03] Debbie Millman: Thank you. Thank you, Donna Palomba, for joining me today on Survivor Stories. Your resilience, your dedication to advocacy through Jane Doe no More is truly inspiring and life-changing. Your courage in sharing your journey and fighting for change serves as a beacon of hope for survivors and their families everywhere. Thank you for your strength and thank you for helping to create a world where survivors are heard, believed, and supported.
[00:38:34] Donna Palomba: Thank you so much, Debbie and thank you for tackling this topic. It is so important.
[00:38:39] Debbie Millman: Thank you. Thank you. For our second conversation today, we're going to be able to view Donna Palumbo's experience in a national context by talking with Jennifer Long, the CEO of Equitas, a non-profit organization dedicated to improving prosecution practices in cases of sexual violence, intimate partner violence, stalking and human trafficking. In addition to leading Equitas, Jennifer is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center, where she is training a new generation of lawyers to prosecute crimes of gender-based violence. Jennifer has held leadership roles at the National Center for the Prosecution of Violence Against Women, and is a former assistant district attorney in the Family Violence and Sexual Assault Unit in the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office. Jennifer Long, thank you for joining me today on Survivor Stories.
[00:39:45] Jennifer Long: Thank you very much. Honored to be here.
[00:39:47] Debbie Millman: Jennifer, we just heard about Donna Palumbo's wrenching experience as a survivor, not only of rape, but as a survivor of an assaultive, dehumanizing law enforcement process. It was also an investigation that was complicated and impeded by the statute of limitations. I'm hoping you can help us understand Donna's experience in context. How typical is the difficult path she had to travel following her assault?
[00:40:16] Jennifer Long: So the first thing I would say is, thankfully, that I would describe that as very atypical. Even though this happened decades ago, it was horrific, it was a horrific and unjustifiable response then, as it would be now. Having said that, I can't sit here and say that something like that would not happen today. In fact, unfortunately, despite research, despite a lot of public awareness and despite many movements, both by people on the ground and national, this fact that we immediately label victims as incredible or we might name them as unworthy of justice still exists, still persists. And as it does, we have to keep being vigilant and fight it.
[00:41:08] Debbie Millman: Donna played a pivotal role in removing the statute of limitations in Connecticut for sexual crimes with DNA evidence. Has that been happening in other states?
[00:41:19] Jennifer Long: So there's been a national movement to really address the disparate application, let's say, of the statute of limitations on rape and sexual violence cases versus other violent crimes. And at the core of that, again, is we have to come back to the same piece, credibility. Because when you think of some other violent crimes for which statutes of limitations may be longer or may not exist at all, the only thing that separates them from a crime of sexual violence is that we still approach these cases almost from a place of trying to disprove them, rather than listening to the evidence and taking it where it leads us. And it's this fear of victims lying, victims, accusing innocent individuals of this crime that goes all the way back to Lord Hale and actually even earlier on that drives all of this. And so Donna is very courageous, both in the moments during immediately following her assault, handling the investigators and their attitudes towards her, and then using her experience to drive change for survivors, not only in Connecticut, but really to drive it around the country.
[00:42:43] Debbie Millman: You just mentioned these circumstances going all the way back to Lord Hale. Can you talk a little bit more about that? This is the first I'm hearing about this.
[00:42:53] Jennifer Long: Sure. So this is I hope I'm getting this century right. It was the 1800s where, I'm going to paraphrase the quote, the accusation of rape is very easily made, but very hard to take back. And that is often sort of pointed to as the reason, the foundation for requiring corroboration in sexual violence cases and rape cases where it doesn't exist in any other case. And that persisted for a long time. In fact, even some laws today have a corroboration requirement. There are 13 of them, if I'm correct by last count, but I would say they're very specific circumstances, some of which might be reasonable. Let's say if a victim was unconscious during an assault, something that was an evidentiary issue. However, I think it's largely recognized and discredited as something that is, again, only exists in this case. We don't have corroboration requirement in laws for robbery, for kidnapping, for other cases. So that is a, you know, a historical basis that women, particularly, because that's who the bulk of the victims are in these crimes, and children, lie.
[00:44:07] Debbie Millman: Donna made a lot of progress in Connecticut. What sort of progress is being made elsewhere?
[00:44:14] Jennifer Long: I can't give you a precise count of how this is shaping up around the country. I would say that the conversations that have been had right now are very, very important, and they're very nuanced. It's not only this push for the statute of limitations, but places like Joyful Heart and others, they're telling us why it's so important. For example, if we think back to the clergy abuse, we recognize, we learned so much about how perpetrators use intimidation, subtle intimidation to interfere with their victim's ability and willingness to report the crime. You know, we heard in those cases where, you know, members of the clergy might take a victim into a confessional to confess the sins of the abuse that they had just suffered, to sort of invoke the name of God, to place fear in them to stop them from reporting. Those are the kind of stories that these efforts around the statute of limitations are really raising, and that's helping the public understand why some of the reasons for delays in reporting. There are other reasons. Some victims, rightly, are just not able or willing to disclose their abuse immediately thereafter. But also, stories like these help the public understand how the statute of limitations is really a barrier. When there has been true intimidation that's been missed for centuries. Really.
[00:45:37] Debbie Millman: You've worked as a prosecutor and at Equitas, and you provide support to prosecutors to make them as effective in their prosecution as possible. From your perspective as a prosecutor, how do statute of limitation laws impact the pursuit of justice in cases of sexual assault?
[00:45:57] Jennifer Long: There are several ways. I'll give a few examples. I mean, the most immediate and obvious way is when a crime is just impossible to prosecute because the statute of limitations has run out and there is not an exception that has stopped it. Some statutes, for example, might say if a perpetrator has left the jurisdiction, but in some cases it's just not possible to go forward. In other cases, it might be possible to go forward on another crime, although not the sexual violence crime. And I think at first sight we may think, okay, well, this is holding someone dangerous accountable. And while yes, it might be better than nothing, it is holding them accountable for something less or different than what they did or not for the full crimes that they perpetrated. And for the victim, it's silencing them, and it's stopping them from getting accountability to a very significant part of the crime committed against them. So in that case, it can have an impact. And then you have cases where you might maybe you have some litigation about some issues that are related to the statute of limitations, which may further delay a proceeding from going forward. And of course, as a prosecutor, one of our duties is we represent the community. So of course we're interested in due process. And that's a very important piece. And there are a lot of laws that are put in place for due process. But there's a very famous Supreme Court case that says justice although due the accused is due the accuser as a victim as well. We must keep the balance. True. And that is sometimes completely forgotten and overlooked in these decisions. So we're lucky we work with prosecutors trying to move forward, trying to find a path forward. And so they very much adhere to that. And I think I'm very lucky to have this job.
[00:47:44] Debbie Millman: So short statutes of limitations can prevent survivors from bringing forth their cases, which then denies them access to the legal system and hindering accountability for perpetrators and keeping that perpetrator out on the streets.
[00:48:01] Jennifer Long: Exactly. Now you have someone very, very dangerous who is moving across the streets of a local community, a state and nation. I mean, one thing we've learned from a project that both Joyful Heart and I and Equitas are part of, the untested rape kit, the sexual assault kit initiative, is how prevalent these perpetrators are. And when they are not stopped, when they're not held accountable, they go on to commit crimes across jurisdictions, victimizing many, many individuals. And, you know, not solely committing the violent crime of sexual violence. They commit murders. They commit robberies, they commit other violent crimes. They perpetrate against all different kinds of victims. And so accountability is so very important for that reason as well.
[00:48:49] Debbie Millman: What are some of the common challenges that you and prosecutors face when dealing with statute of limitations in sexual assault cases? Do they prevent the case from even being prosecuted at all?
[00:49:02] Jennifer Long: Yes. That's the most significant one. Typically, you will try to find another crime in which the statute of limitations has not run, but that may not be possible. Through the research done by people like Rachel Lavelle out of Cleveland State University, formerly Case Western, on the untested kits, we're learning so much about perpetrators, how they learn from their crimes, how they move on, and how these disparate crimes are related. Again, that's not bringing justice to the victim in that case, because that person deserves it as well. But it's at least a way that we can bring that in. So I know that's more of an example of how we overcome the challenges, but that's some of the ways that we look to do so.
[00:49:51] Debbie Millman: You know, survivors of sexual assault experience significant trauma. And not only can that impact their ability, their memory of the assault, and their readiness to come forward and report the crime, they might not even be aware that a clock is ticking. And I think this is a very, very big issue for anyone that is the victim of sexual assault, as they're considering what their options are. I mean, this is not something that's broadly discussed. And for those that aren't looking for this information, it's something that they might not even be aware of. How do we begin to change that?
[00:50:30] Jennifer Long: Absolutely. If you think about different victims, child victims or victims who are not as tuned in with our legal system, although anyone, even people who are tuned in with the legal system, may not be aware of the statute of limitations here. I think it is important when we think of advocacy and access to justice for victims, that they are informed. You know, it's not going to be and it doesn't need to be the moment of their assault. But as they're disclosing, as they're working with advocates and others, there needs to be a process where we let them know not only about the statute of limitations, and I would say advocacy plays a great role there, because I'm thinking of situations where someone is not working with law enforcement at that point, just to make them aware of that. The other piece is, I mean, delay of any kind, obviously, and it's just something for a victim to be aware of and to know. Evidence can get lost, witnesses can get lost. Things don't become stronger with time. That's not a reason to rush through things, but it's information again that victims should be made aware of.
[00:51:37] Debbie Millman: Are there federal statute of limitations or is it all state by state?
[00:51:42] Jennifer Long: There are federal statutes of limitations, but that would impact a federal crime. But most sexual violence crimes are going to be prosecuted at the local level. Now, remember, in the United States, this is going to sound odd. We have 50 states, but we have actually 58 different jurisdictions. We have the federal, the military, the territories and the 50 states, and all of them are going to have different statutes of limitations.
[00:52:07] Debbie Millman: How does extending or eliminating the statute of limitations, if that's even possible for sexual assault cases, impact survivors, but also impact the pursuit of justice?
[00:52:19] Jennifer Long: Well, I mean, I do think it is possible because it's been eliminated in some cases. I think it impacts the pursuit of justice because it makes it accessible to more victims. Again, we're not going to be able criminally to have a retrospective look back on statute of limitations, and that's because the courts have determined that you can't retroactively punish something for something that, let's say, wasn't a crime or where statute of limitations were set. But that's not a reason not to think about going forward. Going forward, it not only gives victims a voice and the ability to get accountability, but it also serves as prevention, letting them know that they can't get away with something just because time has run out. And I think for a third level, it helps the public offer the type of informal justice that victims need. Instead of being faced with why didn't you report? Why didn't you? Which are questions that are so unfair, it gives the public an understanding because when we're doing legislation, we're also educating the community, and it helps them understand that it's natural to delay that there are reasons and to explore some reasons why a victim may decide to not proceed with something at an immediate point.
[00:53:33] Debbie Millman: In New York, Louisiana and about two dozen other states, legislators have created lookback windows. And these have allowed victims to bring lawsuits based on allegations of what could be sometimes decades-old abuse. Those laws aren't about criminal prosecuting someone but bringing a civil suit against them. Can you talk about how they differ from bringing a criminal case and what you think of them?
[00:54:02] Jennifer Long: Sure. We're permitted to have look backs because due process, if you will. I don't want to say it doesn't exist in civil cases, but it's a different analysis. And so there are survivors who may decide that they are unable or unwilling to proceed with a criminal prosecution, but are willing and able to proceed with a civil action, because they may feel that that forum for them may produce some accountability that they're looking for, but may not involve the criminal justice system. As a prosecutor, obviously I have a bias. I want everyone to feel comfortable with, to believe in the criminal justice system and to move forward with it. However, I understand that some people don't. You know, for victims, again, we shouldn't look at even where it still provides some accountability. I don't think we should look at that and say, well, victims have that option and therefore they don't need a criminal justice option because some victims may feel that it's the accountability of the system, the community saying this is wrong. You're going to have a criminal conviction on your record. You may be required to register as a sex offender and be monitored. You may be incarcerated and that form of punishment to pay. And there is a, again, a recognition where the victim isn't the party, it's the community saying that this is wrong.
[00:55:23] Jennifer Long: You know, while I think the civil system is important, it's important as a compliment. I don't think it should ever be seen as a replacement where we can just forget about the criminal justice system, because there are a lot of things that the criminal justice system can do that I think is important to some victims and should be available to them, and certainly important for the community, because it allows us to get these individuals into a system to have reported criminal records so that we can stop them when they are creating extra harms. And again, the more we know about them, you know, if you have someone who has been convicted of a sex offense and let's say they've been released from prison or jail and they are on probation and they're committing what might be have before, again, before Rachel's research or before people were really talking about it so much, seen as, oh, that's a low level, quote unquote, non-violent, not related crime, we can actually see the link and be able to then understand if someone is just beginning a pattern again to create more crime.
[00:56:22] Debbie Millman: Can you talk about the difference between a criminal case, a civil case, or any other case that could be brought against a perpetrator?
[00:56:31] Jennifer Long: Sure. So the criminal case, again, you're going to have very strict rules of evidence. It's a case brought by the state or the government against the perpetrator. The victim in that case becomes a witness. So again, never to minimize what that feels like because of course, the victim has suffered the crime. The victim is the crime scene. A really great illustration of that was the Joyful Heart documentary i'm Evidence, but it's true. So it can be. I think the victim may feel that there is a loss of control, but in a criminal case, the victim becomes a witness. And I think in many ways that can be very empowering. You have the entire power of the state coming behind you, giving you a voice. Standing up for you. Because standing up for justice, when we're prosecuting a case, we don't have a doubt that a crime has happened, or that the person we're prosecuting is the person who committed the crime. So it's not alleged. We are here. We are standing behind you. We are elevating your voice. We are using every legitimate means of understanding our rules of evidence, knowing the research, both legal and social science, medical. Having experts either help us prepare or that we introduce to lay out your case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And we really we over prepare these cases to let the courts and let the community understand that what happened, the perpetrator did it. It was wrong. They must be held accountable. The rules of evidence are stricter. So our rules are tighter, our burden is higher, but it is one that we are trained and we are committed to achieving. In the civil cases, the burden is lower and the accountability is still a finding. And maybe the reparations might be restitution, which, although available sometimes in the criminal venue, is obviously much different than in the civil piece. And then in a protection order, it's a hearing where a victim may not have representation, but they may be able to have a finding and a protection order hearing and get a protection order to prevent someone from committing sexual violence against them.
[00:58:40] Debbie Millman: Thank you for that understanding of these opportunities for victims to pursue justice. The lookback window in New York resulted in over 3000 civil cases being brought against perpetrators of sexual violence. Given the amount of cases resulting in New York from the lookback window, do you ever foresee a time when the statute of limitations in New York or other states could, or federally, could be eliminated entirely?
[00:59:11] Jennifer Long: I mean, it's eliminated entirely for murder.
[00:59:15] Debbie Millman: Right.
[00:59:15] Jennifer Long: So you have to ask yourself why? Why does it persist here? I think we have to be honest about why do we say that this crime is different and be able to stand behind it. I mean, it is so well known now. Of the incidents of sexual violence, such a small number of those victims ever report, and an even smaller number of those cases are accepted for prosecution and move forward for conviction. That's a number for Equitas. We are trying to make a difference. We want to make that circle bigger, not because we are into prosecution and punishment or incarceration, but because we recognize these are very dangerous people committing very dangerous crimes and they need to be stopped and held accountable for what they're doing. But understanding that, I think again, as we learn more, then legislators have to look at themselves and look at the reasons for these laws and why they exist and how they can be justified in light of the other laws on their books and the other absence of statute of limitations, if those exist.
[01:00:18] Debbie Millman: I'm not sure if you're aware of some specificities in New York, but I believe there was an age limit in the lookback laws. At one point I read that it was for people 55 and younger. Do you think that that might be eliminated, that age limit?
[01:00:36] Jennifer Long: I think that should be eliminated. You know, in some ways it's just imposing another statute of limitations within a statute of limitations. Right? I mean, it's so disingenuous. There's no reason. And we know that older individuals, the environment for coming forward, the shame was even higher than it is now. Again, it's a continuum, and everybody has their own barriers to being able to report, being comfortable reporting. But certainly there's a lot embodied in there. So I would say that just is another statute of limitations. So they really look back or it's incredibly ageist. So somehow if you're over 55 you're not credible anymore. I'm not familiar with the reasons behind it. I'm sure somebody put forth a reason. I'm not sure I would accept it.
[01:01:23] Debbie Millman: I know some of the lookback laws, like the law in Louisiana, which allowed victims to file civil lawsuits over sexual violence that did happen decades ago, have run into legal trouble. The law in Louisiana was actually struck down earlier this year by the Louisiana Supreme Court in a very close 4 to 3 decision. Why was it struck down? And are the laws that allow survivors to bring civil suits a good way to actually go?
[01:01:51] Jennifer Long: So generally when these laws are challenged, they're challenged on grounds that they are unfair to defendants in these cases. That evidence is gone, that memories have faded, that it's impossible to defend oneself against a crime because people basically haven't had notice about it. The first thing I would say is we have crimes for which a statute of limitations doesn't exist. So those arguments become very difficult to stand behind because basically the difference, I would say, between a murder and a sexual assault case is, okay, so a murder, you have a body. And I think what people are really saying, though, there is you have proof of a crime. And once again, it comes down to this disbelief about sexual violence that somehow we can't really, truly know this actually happened, or if it wasn't consensual. Something that just doesn't exist everywhere else.
[01:02:56] Debbie Millman: What strategies can prosecutors employ to navigate statute of limitations constraints and potentially effectively prosecute sexual assault cases?
[01:03:08] Jennifer Long: The first thing that prosecutors truly have to do is they need training. But there are hidden cases where there was no attempt to investigate, because an investigator might have seen that the victim was, for example, in the sex trade, or they may have looked at victims who knew the perpetrators, and so they may have taken those cases and not proceeded on them. So I think understanding the role that research and training has played in helping investigators and prosecutors who didn't take cases immediately because they didn't understand victim behavior and victim responses to trauma and so they made initial judgments, which led to no investigation and then again, these untested kits. So I think all of this training helps offices again ensure going forward we're doing better, helps them advocate for new laws with respect to the statute of limitations. It helps them argue, I mean, in some jurisdictions, even where there is not a statute of limitations issue, there may be available redress for the defense for something known as preaccusatorial delay. It's like a second bite at the statute of limitations. It's basically where the defense makes a motion saying that they were harmed. Even though the statute of limitations hasn't run, they were harmed because somehow they had witnesses lost or evidence lost.
[01:04:31] Jennifer Long: And I don't want to fully dismiss it because there may be cases where the law enforcement or prosecutors might have willfully and wrongly done something that might justify that. But too often we are concerned that those motions might be brought to just make a sweeping plea of prejudice, because time has gone by, when in fact the defense cannot point to any material witness that is gone and/or evidence that has been lost or destroyed, where there aren't other witnesses and evidence who can compensate for it. Or perhaps this missing witness, if they can even point to them, doesn't even help demonstrate their innocence. Again, prosecutors, their job is not to represent the victim, to represent the community. So when the prosecutor is coming forward, they are coming forward to do justice and they are coming forward because they believe that they have protected the perpetrator's due process and are holding him accountable. And so, again, prosecutors have to be able to defend against those attacks, and to make sure that they can explain how an understanding of the research has impacted the way all of these crimes are taken forward and can help defend against those attacks. So I think the best way that offices can prepare for this.
[01:05:52] Debbie Millman: Jennifer, in your experience, how do statute of limitation laws intersect with other legal considerations, for example, evidence admissibility, victim credibility, and so forth in sexual assault cases?
[01:06:07] Jennifer Long: I think the idea of a lookback recognizes that victims are not inherently incredible, that there are a lot of things that perpetrators do, that societies do, and that humans just it's just natural course of human response to something traumatic of why they're not able or willing to proceed with something. So lookback laws, first and foremost, understand that victims are not to blame for the assaults against them, that they are not to blame for somehow not doing something. Not reporting. It's important for us, and it demonstrates our understanding of what the barriers are to reporting and to, ,and I think an acknowledgment too, of especially decades ago, how little support there were for victims. Again, you know, things have gotten better. Sometimes, you know, things crop up and it seems like we're back 50 years ago. But, you know, by and large, we're more aware of these crimes. We have more areas to support victims. The lookback laws have a recognition that those things weren't in place. And so they're pro survivor, but they're also due process. They set the crime in line with other violent crimes. It's not something special happening here. I think what's special is the way that sexual violence is treated, not like anything else, somehow not to be believed.
[01:07:30] Debbie Millman: Do you think that states that have had lookback laws that have now been closed might open those windows again?
[01:07:37] Jennifer Long: I hope that they look at states that have put this forward successfully as models and as leaders in these cases. It's again, very hard thinking back to those clergy abuse and the kind of intimidation, just educating ourselves or educating ourselves about intimate partners, and the way that intimidation is so subtle and comes into those crimes and prevents disclosures. I think bringing that all together, I hope that they follow the lead of the states that have implemented these lookback laws.
[01:08:09] Debbie Millman: Jennifer, I have one last question for you. From a policy perspective, what reforms or changes do you believe are necessary to address the limitations of current statute of limitations in all sexual assault cases?
[01:08:25] Jennifer Long: The most important thing that can be done is education on perpetrators. The first thing I would do is, and this isn't the only but it's the most recent research, the Rachel Lavelle research on how perpetrators purposely act and purposely commit their crimes and are very intentional. Learn from what they do. I think it's very important for people to understand that it's not just a misunderstanding. We always say, and this is really probably too simplistic. There are two kinds of rapists, and this isn't, I mean, we got this from another expert doctor, Dr. Veronique Valliere, who talked about two kinds of perpetrators. The one who's like a lion, kind of stalks the prey, and one who's like a, oh my gosh, now I can't remember. It's some sort of spider. It just jumped out of my head. I want to say recluse spider, but that's not it. And that spider sort of sits in the back and just waits. Now they both commit their objective. They both have achieved their objective, getting their prey to eat. They just do it in a different way. And again, sexual violence. We are almost programmed as humans to find sympathy for a perpetrator and to find a reason to discredit a victim.
[01:09:36] Jennifer Long: And so I think understanding how perpetrators behave, that's the first piece. Understanding responses to trauma, understanding the scope of victim behavior and how victims behave. Again, a great example we have of this is the October 7th victims. If you look at released hostages talking about what happened to them, these are individuals. We know the horrific things that happen. They are on camera, and their way of disclosing, the emotions might not be what you would expect of someone who's gone through that level of horror. It's almost like a masterclass in victim behavior. Watch them. And I think this is what our victims, our sexual violence victims do this all over in that they're disclosing and somehow because it's not matching what we expect of them, we don't believe them. And so I think in that way, just removing all of that and also taking a hard look at the laws across the state, the way they're treated, the way the statute of limitations is applied to them. And looking objectively, can you defend the difference between those crimes and the crime you have without somehow discounting sexual violence or discrediting the victims?
[01:10:44] Debbie Millman: Jennifer Long, thank you so much for doing so much work for so many people. And thank you for joining me today on Survivor Stories.
[01:10:54] Jennifer Long: Thank you, Debbie, for having me.
[01:10:56] Debbie Millman: Absolutely. The work that you're doing, the leadership that you have in the fight against gender-based violence is helping so many people. I'm Debbie Millman, the host of Survivor Stories, a podcast of the Joyful Heart Foundation. For more information or to support the work of Joyful Heart, please visit Joyfulheartfoundation.org. And don't forget to subscribe to the show, leave a review and please share with your friends. Be well and thank you for listening.
