mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00006875.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "40",
    "document_number": "452-2",
    "date": "11/12/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 452-2 Filed 11/12/21 Page 40 of 45\nIva A. E. Bicanic et al.\nfactor identified in the univariate analyses with a significant OR (p < 0.05) was entered as a predictor variable into the multivariable model, using a stepwise forward logistic regression (LR) analysis with delayed disclosure as the outcome variable. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit chi-square was used to calculate how well the data fit the model. For all statistical analyses, a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.\nAll statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).\nResults\nSocio-demographic characteristics\nSocio-demographic characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1. Victims' age ranged from 12 to 25 years, with a mean age of 16.7 years (SD = 2.7) and a median age of 16.1 years. Victims' mean age at time of rape was 14.3 years (SD = 2.7) and a median age of 13.9 years. Penetration occurred in 79.6% of the cases. None of the victims reported prior chronic child sexual abuse. Data about victim–assailant relationship are presented in Table 2. Victims first disclosed after a mean 20.8 weeks (SD = 56.8, range 1–624 weeks), although 58.5% of the cases told within 1 week. First disclosure was to a friend (45.8%), parent(s) (17.1%), (ex) boy-friend (9.4%), family member (6.8%), professional (5.8%), or other adult (15.2%). With regard to post-rape services, 53.8% of all victims consulted a doctor for medical care and 51.4% reported to the police. On average, victims were admitted to the centre 59.8 weeks post-rape (SD = 93.7, range 1–676). The mean GSI of the rape victims on the SCL-90-R (M = 209.7, SD = 61.8) was comparable with previously reported data of psychiatric populations [M = 203.55, SD = 61.0; t(269) = 1.629, p = 0.104] and was substantially\nTable 1. Demographic characteristics of rape victims (N = 323) in valid percentages\n|  | N | % |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Dutch origin^a | 274 | 84.8 |\n| Education level^b |  |  |\n| Low | 182 | 58.0 |\n| Medium | 76 | 24.2 |\n| High | 56 | 17.8 |\n| Parents divorced | 102 | 31.9 |\n| Lives at parental home | 273 | 85.3 |\n| Current relationship | 81 | 26.5 |\n| Prior negative sex | 46 | 14.8 |\n^aDutch origin was defined as being a child from parents born in the Netherlands; ^bafter 6 years of general primary school, at the age of 12 years, students enter low (4 years), medium (5 years), or high (6 years) secondary education level.\n4 (page number not for citation purpose)\nTable 2. Victim assailant relationship (N = 323) in valid percentages\n|  | N | % |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Stranger | 94 | 29.5 |\n| (Ex-)Boyfriend | 32 | 10.0 |\n| Friend | 33 | 10.3 |\n| Acquaintance | 61 | 19.1 |\n| Person met during nightlife | 30 | 9.4 |\n| Second-degree relative | 15 | 4.7 |\n| Person seen only once | 15 | 4.7 |\n| Person from school | 14 | 4.4 |\n| Person met on the internet | 12 | 3.8 |\n| Colleague | 10 | 3.1 |\n| Mentor | 3 | 1.0 |\nhigher [t(269) = 24.297, p < 0.001] compared to the general population (M = 118.28, SD = 32.38; Arrindell & Ettema, 1986). For the CDI, mean scores were in the clinical range (M = 17.2, SD = 4.6) and rape victims had significantly higher mean scores (t(230) = 15,923, p < 0.001), in comparison to previously reported data of the general population of adolescent girls (Timbremont, Braet, & Roelofs, 2008; M = 9.01, SD = 6.45).\nDifferences between early and delayed disclosers\nFifty-nine percent of the sample consisted of early disclosers (disclosure within 1 week). No significant differences in demographic characteristics were found between early and delayed disclosers, except that there were more delayed disclosers in the age category 12–17 years compared to the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 6.96; p = 0.008). For rape characteristics, significant differences between groups were found for the use of penetration, with more victims of penetration in the delayed disclosers group compared to the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 5.37; p = 0.02). Also, the delayed disclosers group presented more victims of verbal and/or weapon threats than the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 5.35; p = 0.02). Furthermore, among the delayed disclosers more victims identified the assailant as a close person compared to the early disclosers (χ2 (1) = 10.84; p = 0.001). Alcohol was used more often in the early disclosers group compared to the delayed disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 20.24; p < 0.001).\nWith respect to post-rape characteristics, a significantly smaller proportion of the delayed disclosers (15.9%) utilized medical services following the rape compared to the early disclosers (30.3%; χ2 (1) = 5.32; p = 0.02). Similarly, a significantly smaller proportion of the delayed disclosers (14.6%) compared to the early disclosers (34.3%) reported the rape to the police (χ2 (1) = 16.15; p < 0.001). The time since trauma at admission was significantly lower for early disclosers (M = 41.1 weeks, SD = 79.4) than for delayed disclosers (M = 82.9 weeks, SD = 79.4) than for delayed disclosers (M = 82.9 weeks, SD = 79.4).\nCitation: European Journal of Psychotraumatology 2015, 6: 25883 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/ept.v6.25883\nDOJ-OGR-00006875",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 452-2 Filed 11/12/21 Page 40 of 45",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Iva A. E. Bicanic et al.",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "factor identified in the univariate analyses with a significant OR (p < 0.05) was entered as a predictor variable into the multivariable model, using a stepwise forward logistic regression (LR) analysis with delayed disclosure as the outcome variable. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit chi-square was used to calculate how well the data fit the model. For all statistical analyses, a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.\nAll statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).\nResults\nSocio-demographic characteristics\nSocio-demographic characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1. Victims' age ranged from 12 to 25 years, with a mean age of 16.7 years (SD = 2.7) and a median age of 16.1 years. Victims' mean age at time of rape was 14.3 years (SD = 2.7) and a median age of 13.9 years. Penetration occurred in 79.6% of the cases. None of the victims reported prior chronic child sexual abuse. Data about victim–assailant relationship are presented in Table 2. Victims first disclosed after a mean 20.8 weeks (SD = 56.8, range 1–624 weeks), although 58.5% of the cases told within 1 week. First disclosure was to a friend (45.8%), parent(s) (17.1%), (ex) boy-friend (9.4%), family member (6.8%), professional (5.8%), or other adult (15.2%). With regard to post-rape services, 53.8% of all victims consulted a doctor for medical care and 51.4% reported to the police. On average, victims were admitted to the centre 59.8 weeks post-rape (SD = 93.7, range 1–676). The mean GSI of the rape victims on the SCL-90-R (M = 209.7, SD = 61.8) was comparable with previously reported data of psychiatric populations [M = 203.55, SD = 61.0; t(269) = 1.629, p = 0.104] and was substantially",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Table 1. Demographic characteristics of rape victims (N = 323) in valid percentages",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "|  | N | % |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Dutch origin^a | 274 | 84.8 |\n| Education level^b |  |  |\n| Low | 182 | 58.0 |\n| Medium | 76 | 24.2 |\n| High | 56 | 17.8 |\n| Parents divorced | 102 | 31.9 |\n| Lives at parental home | 273 | 85.3 |\n| Current relationship | 81 | 26.5 |\n| Prior negative sex | 46 | 14.8 |\n^aDutch origin was defined as being a child from parents born in the Netherlands; ^bafter 6 years of general primary school, at the age of 12 years, students enter low (4 years), medium (5 years), or high (6 years) secondary education level.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Table 2. Victim assailant relationship (N = 323) in valid percentages",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "|  | N | % |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Stranger | 94 | 29.5 |\n| (Ex-)Boyfriend | 32 | 10.0 |\n| Friend | 33 | 10.3 |\n| Acquaintance | 61 | 19.1 |\n| Person met during nightlife | 30 | 9.4 |\n| Second-degree relative | 15 | 4.7 |\n| Person seen only once | 15 | 4.7 |\n| Person from school | 14 | 4.4 |\n| Person met on the internet | 12 | 3.8 |\n| Colleague | 10 | 3.1 |\n| Mentor | 3 | 1.0 |",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "higher [t(269) = 24.297, p < 0.001] compared to the general population (M = 118.28, SD = 32.38; Arrindell & Ettema, 1986). For the CDI, mean scores were in the clinical range (M = 17.2, SD = 4.6) and rape victims had significantly higher mean scores (t(230) = 15,923, p < 0.001), in comparison to previously reported data of the general population of adolescent girls (Timbremont, Braet, & Roelofs, 2008; M = 9.01, SD = 6.45).\nDifferences between early and delayed disclosers\nFifty-nine percent of the sample consisted of early disclosers (disclosure within 1 week). No significant differences in demographic characteristics were found between early and delayed disclosers, except that there were more delayed disclosers in the age category 12–17 years compared to the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 6.96; p = 0.008). For rape characteristics, significant differences between groups were found for the use of penetration, with more victims of penetration in the delayed disclosers group compared to the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 5.37; p = 0.02). Also, the delayed disclosers group presented more victims of verbal and/or weapon threats than the early disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 5.35; p = 0.02). Furthermore, among the delayed disclosers more victims identified the assailant as a close person compared to the early disclosers (χ2 (1) = 10.84; p = 0.001). Alcohol was used more often in the early disclosers group compared to the delayed disclosers group (χ2 (1) = 20.24; p < 0.001).\nWith respect to post-rape characteristics, a significantly smaller proportion of the delayed disclosers (15.9%) utilized medical services following the rape compared to the early disclosers (30.3%; χ2 (1) = 5.32; p = 0.02). Similarly, a significantly smaller proportion of the delayed disclosers (14.6%) compared to the early disclosers (34.3%) reported the rape to the police (χ2 (1) = 16.15; p < 0.001). The time since trauma at admission was significantly lower for early disclosers (M = 41.1 weeks, SD = 79.4) than for delayed disclosers (M = 82.9 weeks, SD = 79.4) than for delayed disclosers (M = 82.9 weeks, SD = 79.4).",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Citation: European Journal of Psychotraumatology 2015, 6: 25883 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/ept.v6.25883",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006875",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Iva A. E. Bicanic",
      "Arrindell",
      "Ettema",
      "Timbremont",
      "Braet",
      "Roelofs"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "IBM Corp.",
      "European Journal of Psychotraumatology"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Armonk, NY",
      "Netherlands"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "11/12/21",
      "1986",
      "2008",
      "2015"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 452-2",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006875"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court document or academic paper discussing the characteristics of rape victims and their disclosure patterns. The text includes statistical analyses and references to previous studies. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}