ELIZABETH NOLAN BROWN — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) inflated data about teen girls and sexual assault in a news release about a new CDC report on teenage mental health. In 2021, the percentage of teen girls who reported that they had ever been “forced to have sex” was up 27 percent since 2019, the health agency said, calling it “the first increase since the CDC began monitoring this measure.”

The percentage of teen girls reporting this in the CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey reporting did rise, unfortunately—but not by quite the magnitude that the CDC news release said, reports Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler. The actual increase was not 27 percent, but 18.4 percent.

And even this number leaves some room for doubt, owing to differences in data collection between previous-year surveys and 2021.

“The CDC’s focus on the challenges facing teenage girls — especially regarding mental health — is timely and important. But the CDC’s use of inflated figures on sexual violence could undermine its larger message,” suggests Kessler.

The first problem with the CDC’s data stems from rounding. In 2019, 11.4 percent of teen girls in the Youth Risk Behavior Survey said they had been forced to have sex; in the 2021 survey, it was 13.5 percent. That’s a rise of 2.1 percentage points or—put another way—an 18.4 percent increase. In presenting the data, however, the CDC rounded the 2019 number down to 11 percent and the 2021 number up to 14 percent. Using these rounded numbers, you get a 27 percent increase.

Any increase here is concerning, of course. And whether it’s 11 or 14 percent, that’s still a disturbingly large percentage of teen girls who say they’ve been forced to have sex.

But some experts suggest that CDC data inflate a rise in recent years, since a lot of schools surveyed refused to ask students questions about sexual violence.

The increase in the number of schools choosing not to ask that question is huge. In 2017, 4 percent of schools surveyed didn’t ask their students about any sexual violence and 2 percent didn’t ask about rape, according to mathematician David Stein. In 2019, a quarter of schools surveyed failed to ask questions about any sexual violence and 18 percent didn’t ask about rape. In 2021, 23 percent didn’t ask about sexual violence and, again, 18 percent didn’t ask about rape.

“That could have biased the sample by possibly removing jurisdictions with lower rates of reporting rape and sexual violence,” Kessler points out:

Stein’s analysis of the available 2019 data suggests girls who were not given the questions were considerably younger than those who had received the questions and thus less likely to have had sex and to be sexually active — two factors, he said, that are associated with a higher risk of being a victim of sexual violence.

Elizabeth L. Jeglic, a clinical psychologist who studies sexual violence prevention at John Jay College in New York, said she could not comment specifically on the CDC methodology, but she said sampling and response rate can affect findings. “If the question is asked about lifetime occurrence and younger girls are not being sampled (or less likely to be sampled) you will likely see a higher prevalence rate as older girls will have more years to experience sexual violence than younger girls,” she said in an email.

Kessler notes that “other survey questions with more robust participation by schools — such as violence in dating and violence in bullying — indicated declines, not increases.”

For instance, the National Crime Victimization Survey suggests teen rates of experiencing sexual assault and rape have declined over the past three decades. And the CDC’s Adolescent Behaviors and Experiences Survey (ABES) puts the rape victimization rate at 10.4 percent and the sexual violence victimization rate at 15.3 percent.

A state lawmaker who sponsored the legislation says it’s the first time in Virginia where someone will be compensated for both their time behind bars and the time afterward when they were required to be on the sex offender registry.

“This was such an egregious act, unfathomable in my mind,” said Del. Chris Jones, (R) Suffolk, calling it the worst miscarriage of justice he has ever seen.

The case involved the July, 1997 rape and murder of Michelle Moore Bosko in her Norfolk apartment.

Sailors Danial Williams, Joseph Dick, and Derek Tice were convicted of rape and murder. Eric Wilson was convicted of rape.

Their DNA didn’t match the evidence. Their confessions were forced. The lead detective was corrupt.

Another man eventually confessed to the rape and murder and his DNA matched the evidence from the apartment.

None of it mattered.

Three of the Norfolk four got life sentences for rape and murder, and one got eight years for rape.

“I cannot imagine being in prison for that long and then being on the sex offender list knowing that you’re innocent,” Jones said, “and they knew you were innocent within two to three years of the murder.”

Wilson spent eight years in prison, the other three more than ten each.

The compensation legislation takes into account not only their time behind bars, but also their parole and the time they had to register as sex offenders.

Their payouts will come from the state, and the city of Norfolk must match them. The combined totals range from $1.8 million for Williams to $1.7 million for Tice.

“You can never compensate someone adequately for the time that they’ve lost,” Jones said.

Lost, in large part, because of corrupt police detective Robert Glenn Ford. Documents say he forced illegal confessions from the Norfolk Four.

When Omar Ballard confessed to the rape and murder and his DNA was a match – Ford told him he could avoid the death penalty by implicating the innocent sailors.

Ford was convicted of perjury and taking bribes and is now in federal prison.

The payouts for the Norfolk Four will begin in about 90 days. They will each get an initial payout of about $170,000, with the rest coming over time as an annuity.

Governor Terry McAuliffe gave the Norfolk Four absolute pardons a year ago. Their records are erased and they’re no longer on the sex offender registry.

The legislation requiring the compensation recognizes their “horrific experiences in prison, lost employment opportunities, and shattered relations with family and friends.”

Jones said the efforts of several people and agencies were instrumental in getting the legislation passed, including Norfolk Mayor Kenny Alexander, the office of Attorney General Mark Herring, the Innocence Project, and the law firms of Eckert Seamans, Troutman Sanders, Squire Paton & Boggs, Hogan Lovells and Skadden Arps who served pro bono.

Judge Aaron Persky presided over the 2016 trial of Stanford student Brock Turner, who was ultimately convicted of digitally penetrating an unconscious woman on campus.

With Turner a young first-timer with no previous police record, the Probation Department recommended a sentence of six months in jail and three years’ probation, focused on rehabilitation. As is typical, the judge followed this recommendation. California law also requires that Turner register as a sex offender for the rest of his life—an absolutely crucial factor that Recall proponents don’t discuss.

Many people are very upset about the sentence, thinking it way too light. Six months in jail for raping an unconscious young woman! (Again, ignoring the lifetime sex offender registration.) Outraged, hundreds of thousands of people—most of whom know nothing about the case beyond sensational headlines—want to punish the judge by revoking his job.

That is, they want to undermine judicial independence. Perhaps they misunderstand a judge’s actual mandate. It is NOT to reflect community values, and it is NOT to satisfy the bloodlust OR the sympathy of the community in a given case. No, that’s how it works in places like Russia, Iran, and Egypt, where judges implement community values (as dictated by the government) rather than the law.

A judge’s sworn job is to understand the law and apply it impartially, using the accepted tools of the judicial profession—including knowing and applying precedents, managing conflicting interests in the courtroom, being sensitive to ethical issues, and sifting through the recommendations of various officials within the justice system.

Regardless of how one feels about Judge Persky’s sentencing decision in this case, revoking his job (and destroying his career) undermines the effectiveness and impartiality of every judge in every case. Judges are human; after this recall election, which judge will NOT look over her or his shoulder when making complicated judicial decisions?

As dean of the law school at University of California Berkeley Erwin Chemerinsky says, “Justice, and all of us, will suffer when judges base their decisions on what will satisfy the voters.”

The California Commission on Judicial Performance has cleared Judge Persky of misconduct or bias. Open letters supporting Persky have been signed by 20 retired judges and almost 100 law professors across California. And several County Bar Associations (those are lawyers, not judges) have voted to defend Persky, saying that his removal would be a “threat to judicial independence.”

This Recall election isn’t about whether Aaron Persky deserves to be a judge. It’s about whether the community deserves judges who are independent. The separation of the judiciary from both government and popular opinion is a brilliant innovation of our American system, and we must protect it no matter how painful it feels on a given day.

Even legal system professionals who disagree with Turner’s sentence are against the recall campaign. “Most of the judges in California would have done the same thing as Judge Persky,” says District Attorney Jeffrey Rosen—whose office prosecuted Turner and recommended a six-year prison sentence after his conviction. “I do not believe he should be removed from his judgeship.

* * *

In addition to his jail sentence, Brock Turner is now required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life—some 40, 50, 60, or 70 years.

People dissatisfied with Turner’s “light” punishment apparently know very little about what lifetime sex offender registration means. These convicts face rampant, LEGAL discrimination in jobs, housing, education, and healthcare. They can’t own homes, get school loans, enter most professions, get a basic security clearance, or get police protection. With their passports stamped “registered sex offender,” they’ll be denied entry into virtually any other country on earth.

With their name and address public information—FOR LIFE—there is no such thing as paying a debt to society and living quietly. If a registered sex offender lives with his mother and a church is built next door, he has to move. Murderers literally face fewer obstacles once they leave jail.

As a lifetime registered sex offender, Brock Turner’s life is pretty much over. Months in jail, years in jail—as awful as that is, it’s most certainly LESS awful than being a registered sex offender for life. Do those criticizing Judge Persky’s decision understand or even care about this? Or do they just want a pound of flesh? That’s an ugly and dangerous position from which to sanctimoniously demand public policy.

* * *

The Recall election campaign is underway, with rallies, legal maneuvering, and dueling letters to newspapers and websites.

Of course, that’s how democracy works. But there’s a disturbing note to it: people who oppose the recall are being painted as pro-rape. That is, Recall supporters are making this election a referendum on rape, sexual harassment, domestic violence, and women’s rights in general. They see the actual judge and this actual situation as a convenient archetype rather than parts of real life.

For example, Recall campaign leader (and victim family friend) Professor Michele Dauber, says “This historic [Recall] campaign is part of a national social movement to end impunity for athletes and other privileged perpetrators of sexual assault and violence against women.” She stresses the recall campaign is focused specifically on ensuring that “white, privileged men” are held accountable.

According to The New York Times, the case is being described as “symbolizing the barriers to justice often faced by women and assault victims in the courts.” But this case is more accurately described as a triumph for the justice system: even though unconscious, the woman was rescued by passersby, and the perpetrator was quickly arrested, quickly tried, quickly convicted, and quickly sentenced. And is now required to register as a sex offender for life.

* * *

Hanging Brock Turner—or making sure he rots in jail until he dies—will not make our planet safer. Getting rid of Judge Aaron Persky will not make anyone safer. (In fact, by eliminating judicial discretion, it will disproportionately harm poor people and people of color.)

Oversimplifying this situation as black and white—either you’re for hanging Turner or you trivialize rape—will not make anyone safer. It will instead keep the progressive movement divided, and discourage men and women from working together to change society.

Recall supporters who can’t make a decent argument call anyone with whom they disagree a rape apologist, or accuse others of being brainwashed by the patriarchy, or say their privilege prevents them from thinking clearly. This doesn’t make a Recall supporter right, or even smart. It just makes him or her a bully.

And by pretending that lifetime sex offender registration is a light sentence or a trivial detail, we continue to dehumanize those whose lives are ruined by it. While three years in prison may feel like a lifetime, it’s absolutely nothing in comparison to spending an actual lifetime as a registered sex offender.

Source