Four out of ten traces of suspected sexual abuse are never analyzed

A track hedge using a so-called track hedging kit should be made if it has been less than ten days after a sexual assault. The examination can take several hours and covers the entire body to secure traces and document damage. A procedure, which, in addition to the abuse itself, is often perceived as abrasive.

"It is important to secure traces in order to judge a perpetrator," says Eva Wettborg, head of the forensic analysis team at the Stockholm Police.

But a review by the police and prosecutor's office of more than 600 randomly selected sexual crime cases in 2017 and 2018 shows that only one in three reported abuses are track-proofed and only four in ten were sent for analysis.

Why cases are not analyzed is often deficient, or not at all, documented according to the review. In some cases, it is likely that the case has been closed, in others likely because the suspect has admitted intercourse.

- We need to analyze as many of these track hedging kits as possible. This is partly because we may find a perpetrator committing other or similar crimes, and partly to give the person who has been subjected to a crime redress, says Eva Wettborg, who is critical that no more cases are analyzed.

Responsibility for managing the track hedging rates has been on individual investigators. And the handling has not been legal, according to Eva Wettborg.

- Many track protection kits are probably thrown away, destroyed or lying in a shelf in someone's service room. We cannot know for sure that the tracks that would be sent for analysis have been sent, she says.

In 2018, national guidelines were introduced for how the track hedging kits should be handled and in Stockholm the routines have now been arranged. But elsewhere, business is still being adapted to the new guidelines, according to SVT's documentary "The Rape Track".