Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Early evidence kits in sexual assault: an observational study of spermatozoa detection in urine and other forensic specimens

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the detection frequency of spermatozoa in early evidence kit specimens and in subsequent full forensic specimens in alleged sexual assault.

Methods

Observational cohort study of 100 consecutive alleged sexual assault cases, presenting in Western Australia between 19th July 2008 and 6th February 2012, with both early evidence kit and full forensic evidence specimen collections. Eighty-eight cases were included in the study. Smears from all forensic specimens were analyzed by light microscopy to determine the detection frequency and structural characteristics of spermatozoa. Patient demographic features, characteristics of the alleged assault and details and timing of forensic collections were also recorded.

Results

Spermatozoa were detected in early evidence kit specimens in 35 % (31/88) and in full forensic specimens in 42 % (37/88) of all cases (irrespective of type of alleged penetration). In alleged penile-vaginal penetration, spermatozoa were detected in early evidence kit specimens in 40 % (21/53) of cases when both first void urine and vulval gauze wipe were collected. Spermatozoa were detected in full forensic specimens in 45 % (31/69) of cases. Spermatozoa were detected in early evidence kit oral rinse specimens in 6 % (1/18) of cases of alleged penile-oral penetration and in early evidence perianal gauze wipe specimens in 33 % (2/6) cases of alleged penile-anal penetration. Spermatozoa were detected in the early evidence kit first void urine specimen in a single case, 11 % (1/9), in which the nature of the alleged assault was unknown. Spermatozoa were detected in early evidence kit specimens and not in full forensic specimens in 3 % (3/88) of cases.

Conclusions

Early evidence kit specimens are effective in recovery of spermatozoa, and in particular urine and vulval gauze wipe are worthwhile early forensic specimens for the detection of spermatozoa. Collection of early evidence specimens led to detection of spermatozoa-positive cases, which were not detected by subsequent full forensic specimen collection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Personal safety survey, Australia 2005. 2006a. ABS cat. no. 4906.0. http://www.abs.gov.au. Accessed 16 June 2013.

  2. Australian Institute of Criminology. Guilty outcomes in reported sexual assault and related offence incidents, Crime facts info no. 162, 2007. Last modified June 2009. http://www.aic.gov.au. Accessed 16 June 2013.

  3. Australian Law Reform Commission. Family violence—A national legal response, (Report 114). Section 26. Reporting, prosecution and pre-trial processes 2010. Last modified July 2012. http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/family-violence-national-legal-response-alrc-report-114. Accessed June 20 2013.

  4. Lievore D, Commonwealth of Australia. Australian Institute of Criminology. Non-reporting and hidden recording of sexual assault: An international literature review; 2003. http://www.aic.gov.au. Accessed 21 June 2013.

  5. Astrup BS, Thomsen JL, Lauritsen J, Ravn P. Detection of spermatozoa following consensual sexual intercourse. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;221:137–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Meakin G, Jamieson A. DNA transfer: Review and implications for casework. Forensic Sci Int Genet [Internet]. 2013;7(4):434–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Silverman EM, Silverman AG. Persistence of spermatozoa in the lower genital tracts of women. JAMA. 1978;240(17):1875–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Willott GM, Allard JE. Spermatozoa: their persistence after sexual intercourse. Forensic Sci Int. 1982;19(2):135–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. World Health Organisation. Guidelines for medico-legal care of victims of sexual violence; 2003. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/924154628X.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2013.

  10. Cybulska B, Forster G. Sexual assault: Examination of the victim. Medicine. 2010;38(5):235–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Newton M. The forensic aspects of sexual violence. Best Prac Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27:77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wiese M, Armitage C, Delaforce J, Welch J. Emergency care for complainants of sexual assault. J R Soc Med. 2005;98:49–53.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Butler B, Welch J. Drug facilitated sexual assault. CMAJ. 2009;180(5):493–4.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. HMIC Criminal Justice Joint Inspection. Forging the links: rape investigation and prosecution, a joint review by HMIC and HMCPSI, United Kingdom 2012. http://www.hmic.gov.uk/media/forging-the-links-rape-investigation-and-prosecution-20120228.pdf. Accessed May 2013.

  15. Wyatt J, Squires T, Norfolk G, Payne-James J, editors. Oxford handbook of forensic medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  16. McGregor MJ, Le G, Marion SA, Wiebe E. Examination for sexual assault: Is the documentation of physical injury associated with the laying of charges? A retrospective cohort study. CMAJ. 1999;160(11):1565–9.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rambow B, Adkinson C, Frost T, Peterson G. Female sexual assault: Medical and legal implications. Ann Emerg Med. 1992;21(6):727–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tintinalli J, Hoelzer M. Clinical findings and legal resolution in sexual assault. Ann Emerg Med. 1985;14(5):447–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gray-Eurom K, Seaberg D, Wears R. The prosecution of sexual assault cases: Correlation with frorensic evidence. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39(1):39–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Grossin C, Sibille I, Lorin de la Grandmaison G, Banasr A, Brion F, Durigon M. Analysis of 418 cases of sexual assault. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;131(2–3):125–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Santos J, Neves A, Rodrigues M, Ferrao P. Victims of sexual offences: Medicolegal examinations in emergency settings. J Clin Forensic Med. 2006;13:300–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Riggs N, Houry D, Long G, Markovchick V, Feldhaus K. Analysis of 1076 cases of sexual assault. Ann Emerg Med. 2000;35(4):358–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ingemann-Hansen O, Brink O, Sabroe S, Sorensen V, Charles A. Legal aspects of sexual violence: Does forensic evidence make a difference? Forensic Sci Int. 2008;180(2–3):98–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McGregor M, Du Mont J, Myhr T. Sexual assault medical forensic examination: Is evidence related to successful prosecution? Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39(6):639–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Catherine Nixon MBBS DRANZCOG FRACGP Dip Forens. Med, Detective Senior Sergeant John Hindriksen, WA Police, And all the Forensic Biology staff at PathWest WA for their assistance in this project. Funding for this project was provided by a Women and Infants Research Foundation Grant, Western Australia.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sexual Assault Resource Centre, Perth, WA, Australia

    Debbie A. Smith, Christine A. Bassindale & Maureen A. Phillips

  2. Forensic Biology, PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA, Perth, WA, Australia

    Laurance G. Webb & Angelika I. Fennell

  3. Women and Infants Research Foundation, Perth, WA, Australia

    Elizabeth A. Nathan

Authors
  1. Debbie A. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laurance G. Webb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Angelika I. Fennell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth A. Nathan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christine A. Bassindale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Maureen A. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Debbie A. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, D.A., Webb, L.G., Fennell, A.I. et al. Early evidence kits in sexual assault: an observational study of spermatozoa detection in urine and other forensic specimens. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 10, 336–343 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-014-9562-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-014-9562-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation