top of page
Search

The Story of Denise Huskins

Updated: Nov 4, 2024

A Reflection of the Criminal Legal System’s Treatment of Sexual Assault Survivors

Publishing November 1, 2024

Analysis written by Sydney Braman


The world of sexual assault survivors can seem increasingly daunting, a feeling heightened by a lack of distrust in the criminal legal system’s treatment of survivors. The case of Denise Huskins took the world by storm. Significant errors in the officers’ investigation led to departmental and media accusations of Huskins creating a hoax and misusing police resources. Huskins was kidnapped and raped twice, and officers refused to believe her. This led to cascading mistreatment of her case, outlined in Huskins v. City of Vallejo (1).


The opinion in Huskins outlined how the detectives “made opprobrious comments to Plaintiffs (in one instance, responding to Huskin’s request for a sexual assault exam by stating that she could ‘keep her clothes on’).” After she spent two full days speaking with the Vallejo Police Department, they continued to dispute her narrative. Looking to damage her credibility, they went as far as reaching out to her ex-boyfriend’s neighbors to discuss her mental health.


Denise and Aaron Huskins were both victims of physical assault, with Denise a survivor of sexual assault. These attacks left the couple vulnerable as they faced interrogation from law enforcement. The police department had a duty to protect them as outlined in the “The Victims’ Bill of Rights” under the California Penal Code in addition to other constitutional and statutory guarantees (2). Despite this, the department failed on all accounts and framed the Huskins couple as the perpetrators in their own assaults to the media. In a civil suit filed by the couple against the city, the Huskins’ have since been compensated for the gross investigative errors and misframing of the case that garnered further devastating complications for the couple.


Unfortunately, this is not a one-time occurrence. Drejza v. Vaccaro outlines another heartbreaking story. In this case, Ms. Drejza reported her sexual assault, and the investigation was assigned to Detective Vaccaro. Not only did he seem to lack interest in her case, but he treated the survivor with “derision and scorn, apparently because her assailant was someone she knew.”(3) It was reported he allegedly remained smiling throughout his whole investigation of the case and at no point properly showed compassion to the survivor. Vaccaro went further to dismiss the evidence of her torn underwear and bra, telling her to “take your little panties home with you."(4) She had only been raped an hour earlier, and she was forced to sit through the unspeakable torment of a callous interrogation at her most vulnerable moment.


This trend continues with Brandon v. County of Richardson. The court found that the officer in this case exhibited outrageous behavior as he used crude language while interviewing a sexual and physical assault survivor (5). The court even went further to find the plaintiff’s allegations of abuse were sufficient but the officer failed to forward the victim’s rape kit on time, failed to communicate with the prosecutors, and maintained inappropriate relationships with the suspects to uphold a “blame the victim” attitude (6). The officer’s failure to complete integral elements of the investigation caused great emotional harm to the survivor. As a result of the officer’s dismissal of the case, the plaintiff was shot to death by the two men who sexually assaulted her. 


That said, it is not solely police officers who have been found guilty of inadequately caring for sexual assault survivors. Criminology scholars have come to “suggest the nexus of police officers, prosecutors, attorneys, and judges who serve in the criminal and civil legal systems not only fail to help survivors, but actively cause harm by ignoring abuse and failing to act in serious situations, such as denying orders of protection or enacting mandatory arrest policies.”(7) One could think about this in terms of the Huskins’s case as well. The convicted individual in this case was a Harvard graduate lawyer. This case exemplifies the importance of the rule of law – that no one at any level of the criminal legal system is above the law.


Furthermore, the report by Lorenz et al. elaborates on the overall outcomes of experience with the criminal legal system from the perspective of survivors themselves. A plethora of survivors report they face negative social reactions that perpetuate stigmatization, secondary victimization, and victim-blaming (8). This leads to increased trauma for the survivor. Some victims went as far as to say the investigative encounters were more harmful than the assault itself, which has led to some survivors opting not to report their assaults to law enforcement (9). That said, this is not the sole reason survivors do not reach out for help. Many are afraid of backlash from the perpetrator or have a sense of internalized blame. This was the motivation for Denise Huskins. She feared telling the police because her rapist threatened that if she did so, he would release the video of her assault. Additionally, the media fully blamed her and alleged that she was reporting a false narrative. Overall, many experiences with the criminal legal system result in a motivation of distrust and fear. 


These stories should undoubtedly compel those involved within the system to be considerate of those they are serving. No matter what role one may play, it is inherently important to aid someone when they come to request it. Positive change can be achieved through proper investigations, adequate sentencing practices, the upholding of victims’ rights, and an overarching sense of respect.




 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page