NCJ Number
178871
Journal
Crime and Delinquency Volume: 45 Issue: 3 Dated: July 1999 Pages: 334-357
Date Published
July 1999
Length
24 pages
Annotation
This article explores civil liability under State tort law against criminal justice personnel engaged in police sexual assault, and concludes that government agencies need to collect systematic data on the prevalence of sexual violence committed by police, correctional personnel, and other personnel and to monitor employees' deviant acts effectively.
Abstract
Courts impose vicarious liability on criminal justice agencies under the doctrine of respondeat superior when their employees commit sexual assault within the scope of employment. Courts use five judicial tests to decide the issue of scope of employment. These tests include: (1) whether the sexual assault was committed under the guise of apparent agency authority; (2) whether the act was incidental to authorized agency activities; (3) whether the act was a foreseeable consequence of agency activities; (4) whether the act accomplished or furthered agency objectives; and (5) whether the act solely gratified personal desires and impulses. These legal tests are not mutually exclusive. Courts have also litigated cases using a variety of tort principles that are separate from vicarious liability under respondeat superior. Actions have been initiated under the intentional torts of humiliation, fear, emotional distress, sexual assault, rape trauma syndrome, changes in bodily appearance, and the permanent loss of a bodily function. Courts now tend to use an expansive definition of scope of employment. Further research is needed to examine sexual assault within criminal justice occupational subcultures and to develop theoretical and policy recommendations. In addition, government agencies need to collect data and monitor incidents. Notes and 67 references (Author abstract modified)