$2.5M awarded to develop sexual assault kit tracking system in Pennsylvania
The award comes from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and will help the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency to improve the support for survivors of sexual violence and increase accountability.
'Rape and sexual assault is about power – attackers want to take away their victims' power and dignity, their feeling of safety and security,' Lieutenant Governor Austin Davis, who serves as chair of PCCD said. 'As leaders, we need to do everything we can to help victims feel safe and whole again. If a victim is able to summon the strength to go through the process of getting a sexual assault examination and file a police report, they deserve to know their rape kit is being handled with care and attention, that their case is a priority. Here in Pennsylvania, we're reducing the backlog of processing rape kits, but there's much more work to be done. Now that we've passed Senate Bill 920, Governor Shapiro has signed it into law and with this federal funding, we can create a statewide tracking system that keeps victims informed and helps them get their power back.'
Over $3M invested in Pennsylvania to develop maternal health coalitions
In October of last year, a bill that would require Pennsylvania to develop a tracking system and enhance the rights of sexual assault victims was signed into law. That bill was sponsored by Senator Wayne Langerholc and he said that this award will help to support survivors.
'Act 122 reinforces the Commonwealth's dedication to supporting survivors and ensuring offenders are held accountable. This rape kit tracking system will allow sexual assault survivors to track the progress of their kits throughout an investigation,' Langerholc said. 'The $2.5 million federal grant from the Sexual Assault Kit Initiative will help launch the system sooner, ensuring faster access for survivors.'
Sexual assault kit testing can be a lengthy process and it can lead to backlogs in crime labs. Automated sexual assault kit tracking systems allow survivors to know where their sexual assault kit is throughout the testing process and prompt efficient processing to prevent backlogs and delays, which in turn can speed up the criminal justice process and prevent future assaults.
A portion of the funds will be used to develop a state-level team to build on Pennsylvania's efforts for sexual assault evidence collection.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
18 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Federal judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit challenging Illinois, Chicago sanctuary policies
A federal judge in Chicago on Friday blocked the Trump administration's challenge to policies in the state of Illinois, the city of Chicago and Cook County that limit the powers of state and local police in assisting federal law enforcement on immigration-related matters. The ruling comes as the Trump administration has ramped up mass deportation efforts targeting noncitizens living in the U.S. without legal permission, particularly in big cities that have sanctuary laws like Chicago, where activities from federal immigration agents have been met with protests. In her ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge Lindsay Jenkins dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety, saying the U.S. Department of Justice lacked standing, though she allowed the department to amend its complaint. The case centered around the 10th Amendment, which addresses state and federal powers. 'The Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants' decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law—a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by (the federal Immigration and Nationality Act),' Jenkins wrote. 'Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment. It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity—the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' A spokesperson for the Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Among the arguments made by the Justice Department when it filed its lawsuit earlier this year was that the sanctuary policies violated the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause, which the department argued 'prohibits Illinois, Chicago, Cook County, and their officials from obstructing the Federal Government's ability to enforce laws that Congress has enacted or to take actions entrusted to it by the Constitution.' The lawsuit specifically went after the state's 2017 Trust Act, signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker's predecessor, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner. The law generally prohibits state and local law enforcement from getting involved in deportation efforts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or other federal policing agencies dealing with immigration matters. While the Trust Act prevents state and local law enforcement from assisting the federal government with regular immigration enforcement, it allows coordination when there is a federal criminal warrant involved. Chicago's sanctuary city ordinance bans official cooperation between local law enforcement and federal deportation authorities, while ensuring immigrants living without legal permission can use city services. The lawsuit also takes on a Cook County statute that bans ICE agents from the county jail and other facilities unless they have a criminal warrant unrelated to immigration. Chicago's sanctuary designation has existed since Mayor Harold Washington signed an executive order in 1985, but it was adjusted after Trump took office the first time in 2017. Now, the intent is to make sure immigrants in the country without legal permission can still report crime without fearing deportation, while depriving the feds of a key resource — local police. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Pritzker this year have testified separately before President Donald Trump's Republican allies in Congress to defend their sanctuary policies. The Democratic governor's visit to Washington happened last month when he defended the policies before a House committee while pointing at congressional Republicans and Democrats for using the issue to try to score political points rather than enacting comprehensive immigration reform. On Friday, Pritzker praised the ruling, saying it showed Illinois has 'always been and still is compliant with federal law.' 'Illinois ensures law enforcement time and energy is spent fighting crime — not carrying out the Trump Administration's unlawful policies or troubling tactics,' Pritzker spokesman Matt Hill said in a statement. 'As the grandchild of Ukrainian refugees, the Governor's personal story shows how immigration is central to America's story, economy, & culture. He told it to Congress when he laid out how Illinois follows the law and would like the feds to follow suit.' The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois also applauded the ruling, saying the court 'was correct to reject the Trump Administration's lawsuit and to allow public officials in Illinois and Chicago to follow our policies that prioritize local public safety and welfare over federal civil immigration enforcement.'
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Miami Herald
Have a Jeffrey Epstein question? Ask Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown
The fallout from the Trump administration's July decision not to release documents from the government's investigation into deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein has led to public outcry and created divisions within the Republican Party. Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown first exposed how Epstein was able to get away with sexually abusing hundreds of girls with minimal consequences in her Perversion of Justice investigation. Her reporting on the sweetheart deal federal prosecutors gave Epstein, who counted President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton and British royal Prince Andrew among his friends, led the Southern District of New York to bring new charges against the financier in 2019. He died in federal custody soon after, in what has been ruled a suicide. Epstein's accomplice and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested the following year and convicted in 2021 for her role in recruiting girls for Epstein and participating in their abuse in at least one instance. She's now serving a 20-year sentence at a federal prison in Tallahassee. Since then, Epstein's network of powerful friends — some of whom were accused of partaking in his sexual abuse — and Epstein's death itself have been the subject of numerous conspiracy theories. With many of Trump's supporters demanding answers, the U.S. Department of Justice is moving to release testimony from the grand jury that indicted Epstein in 2019. A top Justice Department official is also meeting with Maxwell to see if she can provide more information. The U.S. House Oversight Committee is also set to meet with Maxwell next month. There's no one who knows the Epstein story better than Brown, who will be answering reader questions to help separate fact from fiction in a story that has captured the public's attention like no other. Can't see the form below? Click here to fill it out.
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Miami Herald
Five questions about Jeffrey Epstein with Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown
Julie K. Brown's 2018 Perversion of Justice investigation revealed how the U.S. Justice Department gave the now-deceased sex trafficker the deal of a lifetime and cut his victims out of the process. That reporting led the Southern District of New York to bring new sex crime charges against Epstein in 2019, but he died in federal custody one month later in what has been ruled a suicide. Epstein's vast network of high-powered friends, including President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton, along with Epstein's shocking death, have given rise to numerous conspiracy theories. When the U.S. Department of Justice declined to release more information about its investigations into Epstein, it led to public outcry and caused a rift in the Republican Party. The Miami Herald asked Brown five questions to help readers separate fact from fiction in a scandal that continues to capture the public's attention like no other. The conversation has been edited for clarity. Q: Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly told President Donald Trump earlier this year that he is in the Epstein files. Is that a surprise? What do you think might be in the files related to Trump's relationship with Epstein? A: Well, Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were very good friends for many years. They moved in the same social circles in New York and in Palm Beach, where they both had homes, and they both had a lot in common. They both liked beautiful women, as Trump is often quoted as saying, noting that Epstein liked them on the younger side, as he said in an interview many years ago. So we know that they were friends. We are uncertain how close they were and also uncertain as to when their friendship had broken off because we kept hearing that they had a falling out at some point over a real estate deal and then later over an incident that happened at Trump's club Mar-a-Lago, involving a member who claimed that Epstein hit on his underage daughter. From that point, from what we understand, there was a falling out, and there wasn't really as close of a friendship. But in the '90s and early 2000s, it was thought that they were pretty close. Trump had to know that he was in the files in some aspect because there have been plenty of stories written about him being on the plane, and the plane logs are part of some of these files. It's been well reported that he was part of the so-called little black book, which was essentially a phone directory that had almost every single imaginable phone number that Trump had, including his car phone, his secretary and his office. And then the third thing is he was on the message pads as having called Epstein back in the early 2000s. When the Palm Beach police searched Epstein's home, they found hundreds and hundreds of message pads, and Trump's name was on some of those, indicating that he had called Epstein. So, it'd be hard to believe that Trump didn't realize his name was in the files in some aspect since the black book itself was part of those files. Q: Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Ghislaine Maxwell on Thursday, and the U.S. House Oversight Committee plans to talk with her in August. What kind of information do you think Maxwell could reveal? A: Ghislaine Maxwell knows pretty much everything, I think. She was what the victims consider the mastermind of Epstein's sex trafficking organization. She was recruiting women to both work for Epstein and help schedule his trysts with these girls, these massage sessions, as they were called at the time. But she started the ball rolling by going into spas and gyms throughout Palm Beach and giving her business card to to young girls and telling them, 'You know, I work for a very wealthy man. He is looking for a masseuse. You can make a lot of money.' And that's what got the ball rolling. Some of the victims consider her in some aspects worse than Epstein because they felt safe with her. Here was this woman that was a very nurturing kind of personality, very bubbly, telling them that this man's fine, he's going to help you. And they trusted her to some degree. So then to learn that she was part of the crime was a real betrayal to them because they were sort of tricked into this world by Ghislaine Maxwell. Q: In the wake of the Justice Department's decision not to release files from its investigation into Epstein, they are now seeking to have grand jury records released from the two federal investigations into Epstein and its investigation into Ghislaine Maxwell. What do we think these records will show? A: The Justice Department right now seems to be limiting its scope of what it's going to release or try to get unsealed. There were apparently two grand juries in Florida that were seated back in 2005 and 2007. Then there was another one in 2019 concerning Epstein's crimes and another in 2020 concerning Maxwell's crimes. At least that's what the motion that was filed by the Justice Department indicated. And so what they're seeking is all the underlying documents, mainly the testimony that was presented before all these grand juries. It's hard to know what was in the earlier grand jury because it never resulted in an indictment. The records that we do have concerning the early federal probe into Epstein indicates that the prosecutors were having a hard time being able to present witnesses before those grand juries because Epstein's lawyers kept trying to intervene and present all kinds of reasons for them not to go before a grand jury. So it was very messy at the time, and we really don't know how successful they were in presenting any kind of evidence back then. And then in 2019, the FBI ended up reinvestigating the case. We know that there was another grand jury, but we believe that the information that was presented to the grand jury back in 2019 was very narrowly focused on the minimum amount of evidence that they would need to get an indictment for Epstein. Traditionally in grand jury cases, you don't present your whole case anyway. You don't present all your witnesses. You just try to find a minimum amount of information in order to get an indictment. You can always do another indictment if it turns out the case is bigger than that or there's more crimes that you encounter, but initially you just want to get a minimum indictment. And that's what happened in 2019 and also with Maxwell in 2020. Q: Is there an Epstein list? If so, who do you think is on it? A: I don't think there was a proverbial Epstein list, per se. It was Maxwell who kept his little black book. Epstein wasn't really adept at using computers, and he used other people that worked for him to compile things on computers, for example, so I don't think he had a singular list. What I do think is that he was a businessman and that he probably kept files on these men because a couple of the victims said that Epstein had quizzed them after their massage slash sex sessions about what kind of things the men enjoyed in the bedroom. And they thought that he was doing that in order to get something on the men. Q: No one understands the Epstein story better than you do. Why do you think it has held the public's attention for so long? A: I think that the reason why the Epstein story has held the public's attention is because it's a mystery that has all the elements that people gravitate toward. It has money, politics, sex, crime and mystery, because we really don't know all the answers. I think the public is very suspect of our government and the way that it operates. There is a distrust of the way that our government withholds information, for example, or covers things up, in their minds. So I think that this is an example of a case that still is a mystery, even after 20 years. We don't know all the answers, and it's a horrific crime. One would think that our government would have wanted to get to the bottom of how this happened a long time ago. If you have more questions for Julie K. Brown, fill out the form below to send her a question. Can't see the form below? Click here to fill it out.
