iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

FBI's Definition Of Rape Is Outdated And Narrow, Agency Panel Concludes


First Posted: 10/20/11 02:53 PM ET Updated: 10/20/11 05:54 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- The FBI took a step away from the archaic way it defines rape on Tuesday, when an agency panel voted to update the federal definition for the first time since 1929.

Currently, the FBI defines rape as the "carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will."

This definition is narrower than the one used by many police departments around the country, and women's rights advocates say it leads to the under-counting of thousands of sexual assaults each year.

On Tuesday, an FBI panel composed of outside experts from criminal justice agencies and national security agencies voted to broaden the federal government's definition.

The new definition would take out the requirement that the sexual assault be "forcible," remove the restriction that the attack be toward a woman and include non-vaginal/penile rape and rape by a blood relative.

The panel's recommended definition reads: "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

Carol Tracy is executive director of the Women's Law Project, which has been pushing the FBI to change its definition for the past decade.

On Sept. 20, 2001, Tracy wrote a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller arguing that the current definition "seriously understates the true incidence of sexual assault in the United States today, confuses and hampers law enforcement, and discourages victims from reporting serious crimes."

"I think that although this change is long overdue, the fact that it is being vetted very thoroughly through local and national law enforcement is really important," Tracy said in an interview with The Huffington Post.

The panel that approved the change is a subcommittee of the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Board (APB), which will vote on the new definition at its Dec. 6-7 meeting in Albuquerque, N.M. If the APB approves the change, it will go to Mueller for final sign-off.

"I think a clear consensus is emerging, so I'm optimistic," Tracy said of APB approving the change.

The Feminist Majority Foundation has also been leading a "Rape is Rape" campaign, calling on the public to pressure the FBI to update its definition.

"This will ensure the crime of rape is measured in a way that it includes all rape, and it essentially becomes a crime to which more resources are allocated. It's intolerable the amount of violence against women, and we feel this will have a significant impact," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, to Ms. Magazine.

The FBI's current narrow definition of rape has also created complications for law enforcement agencies, who can't report all the rapes they prosecute for inclusion in federal statistics if their state or locality has a broader definition.

For example, in 2010, the Chicago Police Department reported nearly 1,400 sexual assaults. None of them, however, appeared in the federal crime report because they didn't fit the federal government's definition of rape.

"We prosecute by one criteria, but we report by another criteria," Steve Anderson, chief of the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department, told The New York Times. "The only people who have a true picture of what's going on are the people in the sex-crimes unit."

According to the federal 2010 Uniform Crime Report, there were 84,767 sexual assaults reported in 2010, a 5 percent drop from the previous year.

In a recent survey by the Police Executive Research Forum, nearly 80 percent of the 306 police departments that participated said the federal definition of rape was outdated.

The FBI declined to provide a comment.

This story was updated with the FBI's response.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- The FBI took a step away from the archaic way it defines rape on Tuesday, when an agency panel voted to update the federal definition for the first time since 1929. Currently, the FBI...
WASHINGTON -- The FBI took a step away from the archaic way it defines rape on Tuesday, when an agency panel voted to update the federal definition for the first time since 1929. Currently, the FBI...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 312
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
averagezoe
Don't breed or buy while homeless animals die!
09:53 PM on 10/27/2011
I agree that the definition needs to be updated, but I think that the definition of "statutory rape" needs an even more drastic overhaul. This is 2011 and just to name one recent incident as an example: a woman was charged with sexual assault for having sex with a 17 year old boy. Anyone who believes that this boy was "assaulted" needs a serious reality check. Under the current laws, any sexual contact with a minor by an adult is a crime because under the law, a minor is incapable of giving consent. I see today's teenagers and pre-teens in action and they are capable of much more than mere consent. While I personally don't quite understand why several adult, mature women who have made headlines lately would enjoy having sex with immature boys, they are guilty of poor judgement and questionable taste, but by no means of sexual assault.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
03:13 PM on 10/28/2011
It may not be assault, but it is statutory rape. Even though these boys gave consent, they are minors and should be protected by law. However, some of these posts are ignorant of reality. Rape by women (almost always of the "statutory" nature) is not even close to as common as rape of women by men, which most often involves weapons and sometimes death. Men also rape other men, and that is also usually an actual assault. Most Pedofiles are also men, so the posters who say this crime is equal between men and women are not even close to relating actual facts. When have you read of a serial woman rapist terrorizing a community? Most anytime a woman commits a violent crime it makes headlines. All violent crimes by men do not - there are too many. But even my saying this will bring out those who will want to pretend I am a "man hater." LOL
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
billywms
06:23 PM on 10/22/2011
Great article Amanda!-& it's about time they change the definition!
06:09 PM on 10/21/2011
They need to adress false rape acusations also
Remember the Duke Rape case
02:03 PM on 10/21/2011
Really about time...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arielman
Anthropology degree, shovel-bum
10:47 AM on 10/21/2011
At first reading I was reminded of reading the law in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) as if the first part was lifted directly from it. However Article 120, appears to have been rewritten in 2007 and appears quite different (http://tinyurl.com/66mhzxs and further). As a citizen /anthropologist I think there were similar problems in the UCMJ now more clearly defined in the Article language. By the way, the first Court Martial trial in the United States in which enlisted men were allowed to sit as members of the court – February 3, 1949 - was on Governors Island, in NYC.
10:18 AM on 10/21/2011
I would like to see a gender nutrual law, and men and woman recieve the same sentencing. I feel for far to long Female Predators have used the law to excape long prison sentencing
photo
goatini
We are two-legged wombs, that’s all
08:42 PM on 10/27/2011
Spreading your LIES on this article, too, I see.

Face it, rape and domestic violence are crimes primarily committed by MALES.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
karen lyons kalmenson
i poem/paint, sometimes, i ain't
08:17 AM on 10/21/2011
any sexual act, regardless of gender or species of either the victim or the one who victimizes, when the victim has not consented or is unable to, due to species, age, mental status, etc is rape.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tochi Opara
05:11 AM on 10/21/2011
All my life, I've never heard of a woman raping a man before. I'm sure it happens though. How exactly can a man be raped by a woman though?? I mean, a man raping a woman is easy to understand and obvious but a woman raping a man just seems "physically impossible" considering the man has to be "ready".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
karen lyons kalmenson
i poem/paint, sometimes, i ain't
08:18 AM on 10/21/2011
it has been shown that "ready" or "responsive" sometimes happens during rape, and that does not in any way imply that rape has not been perpetrated.

.
10:03 AM on 10/21/2011
OK, she slipped him a roofie and he woke up bleeding.

It was "that" kind of rape, not..."that" kind....

Guilty of rape, doesn't have to register as sex offender ...

news.mensactivism.org/node/14199

Nov 21, 2009 – JXXXX Mcxxxxx will be sentenced Jan. 22. She faces prison and hefty fines but won't have to register as a sex offender -- a result that the ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wake Up Call
Poking your brain with a pointy stick.
02:33 AM on 10/21/2011
So if a woman eats something at a restaurant (object going into orifice) and decides she doesn't like it, then she can charge the cook with rape.
05:48 PM on 10/21/2011
I never looked at it that way lol
04:43 PM on 12/09/2011
Only if she said no before he put the food in her mouth. Moron. You can't even make a cohrrent connection with the topic, so how can you possibly create a joke? Jokes are funny, because they do have a grain of truth to them or can be related to by the masses.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
09:25 PM on 10/20/2011
Seems like an easy fix. That means it should take the government 5 years to change this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free nel
09:06 PM on 10/20/2011
Guys get raped too!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beckym1488
I have dislike for Libs
09:39 PM on 10/20/2011
The panel's recommended definition reads: "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

Guys have a mouth and an anus, right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free nel
10:01 PM on 10/20/2011
Wasn't talking about the law. Why isn't there an anti-rap group for guys.. Just saying
05:54 PM on 10/21/2011
How would this law apply to the lesbian population
08:50 PM on 10/20/2011
I would like the crime of "Public intoxication" to also mean drinking booze in one's yard,where disorderly conduct[like peeing behind the bushes, making obscene gestures,etc.], can be seen from the street or from the neighbors 2nd story windows. Seriously.Where the public can see this going on I would consider this to be P.I. also.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
10:07 AM on 10/21/2011
If you're looking into their yard from your second story windows that's YOUR fault.
01:40 PM on 10/21/2011
So "bright eyes", they have a right to do whatever in their yards but we better not look at their yards from INSIDE our home. You f. idiot, listen to yourself.
photo
MyAhaMoment
Mississippi Liberal: a rare breed, indeed!
02:24 PM on 10/21/2011
You should be able to call the police and get them charged with Drunk and Disorderly. And if they're really tanked, they'll probably get Resisting Arrest, a Profanity charge and a few others that can be thrown in for good measure, just can't remember them right now. (shouldn't have done those things that kill off brain cells, when I was younger)
07:59 PM on 10/21/2011
MyAhaMoment:Your answer gave me hope for peace and tranquility in ones neighborhood. Otherwise we can't look out our 2nd flr. window because we have to live with whatever we see, that don't seem right,thanks.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissTake1989
Equal means equal, hypocrites.
08:03 PM on 10/20/2011
"The panel's recommended definition reads: "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.""

So...Bill Clinton was right...?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free nel
09:05 PM on 10/20/2011
I don't get it :(
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissTake1989
Equal means equal, hypocrites.
04:26 PM on 10/22/2011
Well, I don't see oral sex on this list?

It's not rape if it's just oral???
photo
MyAhaMoment
Mississippi Liberal: a rare breed, indeed!
02:25 PM on 10/21/2011
She was willing.
07:25 PM on 10/20/2011
Well expanding the range of crimes included will certainly cause a major increase.Which is the point of it .This increase in turn will be ceaselessly talked and ruminated about..When in Reality Crimes of all kinds have been on the decline for generations now. But living in a safer better world is not a message that sells. They did the same thing by changing obesity standards to include many more people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free nel
09:06 PM on 10/20/2011
Wow.. Just wow.. I'm guessing you have no Idea the emotional consequence of rape.
10:06 AM on 10/21/2011
I'm guessing you have no idea about the emotional consequence of false accusations.

This is about filling for profit prisons.
photo
Info08
That's right, I have my eye on you
06:56 PM on 10/20/2011
I'm not sure how this is going to help in the courtroom, but at least it's a start.

I've served on three juries that have heard rape cases. In one of those cases we (the jury) had no choice but to acquit the defendant because the prosecution just didn't meet the burden and the complaining witness' story had too many inconsistencies.

However, most of us were quite convinced that something terrible had happened to the complaining witness. The problem was the prosecutor arrogantly wanted B Felony Rape and nothing less. Understandably it carries a mandatory prison sentence, even for someone with no priors, but it has a tougher burden. In He said/She said cases, if the prosecutor misses the thin margin involving hard evidence, story and timeline, the charge will fail in deliberations because the jury is charged specifically by the judge that the evidence must meet the burden.

We saw photographs of the victim's body that revealed bruises on her face, legs and arms. She got beat up pretty good. If the prosecutor had simply just "thrown the book" at the defendant, we would have at least been able to indict the physical assault. It certainly would have given him some time in prison. But we had to let the defendant go.
09:38 PM on 10/20/2011
Love how people say, "we had to let the defendant go." You chose to do so. You didn't have to. Maybe you were right in doing so, maybe not.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greg Gorelick
Logic: your friend
10:05 PM on 10/20/2011
Do you understand how the law in this country works? They HAD to let him go.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
06:37 PM on 10/21/2011
No, they had to do so according to the law's requirements.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
11:20 PM on 10/20/2011
It occurs to me that if line-cooks and Zamboni drivers made better wages, we would have fewer bad lawyers like that prosecutor.