Online dating sites have proliferated over the last few years. Current research suggests that 200 million people visit online dating services a month (source: Online Dating Magazine). This new social venue offers people an opportunity to meet who might not ordinarily have a chance to meet because of their busy schedules. Online dating services offer many pluses—they allow someone to pick and choose his or her selection based on physical descriptions, interests, and goals. Unfortunately, online dating services also provide opportunities for those who have less-than-honest intentions. These services are no different from any other online venue. They provide a cloak to those who wish to portray themselves any way they want with very little validation.???
The Jeffrey Marsalis Case
None of the cases we’ve dealt with in our professional careers rise to the level of the case of Jeffrey Marsalis, a 34-year-old Philadelphia man who was accused, but later acquitted, of raping nine women, six of whom he met through Match.com (see Figure 6.1).
Marsalis claimed to be a doctor, a CIA agent, an FBI agent, and even an astronaut. During his trial, his fiancée testified that he often took her with him to a local hospital, dressed in a lab coat and scrubs, and went into cadaver labs and medical supply rooms—unchallenged by security guards. Marsalis’s victims were intelligent, professional women, including one attorney. Marsalis often produced official-looking badges that are easily purchased online and through police supply catalogs.
During the course of Marsalis’s trial, all the victims gave almost identical testimony as to Marsalis’s methods, including the fact that although they drank little alcohol, they all blacked out and lost their memory. By the time they regained consciousness, they realized they had either already had a sexual encounter or were in the midst of one with Marsalis. FBI chemists testified that they believed the women’s drinks had been laced with the active ingredient found in Benadryl, which would explain the syringe found in Marsalis’s apartment containing 50 mg of the drug in liquid form.
None of the victims reported the alleged rape to authorities until much later; therefore, there was no way to test their blood for the presence of drugs.
Marsalis’s attorney claimed the sex was consensual in all cases and that the women were angry for being duped. The jury acquitted Marsalis on 24 total counts of rape, but did find him guilty of two counts of sexual assault—for which he could serve 10 to 20 years in prison.
Recently, online dating services have been in the press’s spotlight when New Jersey became the very first state in the nation to require online dating services to disclose whether or not they perform any kind of background checks on members. True.com, an online service, lobbied for such a law. True.com’s founder, Herb Vest, was quoted as saying, “The online dating industry tends to get a real bad rap, because of criminal activity. If we were to clean up, there’s hordes of offline singles who’d come online to find their soul mate”.
However, industry critics have been quick to point out that True.com’s screening method—running names through state databases of criminal records—is incomplete and easily thwarted. This could lead to a false sense of security. Although some type of background check is better than nothing, unless the database utilized is a true criminal history check, the information cannot be validated. The most reliable source is the Interstate Intelligence Index (III), which is utilized by law enforcement through NCIC (National Crime Information Center). This database is controlled by the FBI and is not accessible to online dating sites. It cannot be emphasized enough that just because someone has no criminal history, it does not mean that person has no deviant or criminal tendencies.
We’d like to elaborate a bit on just what running a criminal history check involves and what an organization other than law enforcement might get or not get.
The “official” repository of criminal history information is NCIC—the National Crime Information Center database—which is hosted by the FBI. Many different types of records are maintained in this database, including criminal history.
If someone is arrested and convicted as an adult, that information becomes part of that person’s criminal history record, which is usually a public record. Note that we emphasize “if someone is arrested and convicted,” because the reality is that someone could be investigated by a law-enforcement agency numerous times for rape or assault and it is never reported. Unless there is an actual arrest and conviction, no notification is made to any criminal database because, technically, there is no criminal record. And in order to have a criminal history, you have to have a willing victim report it, follow through with an investigation, have an arrest, get an indictment, and then get a conviction. If no conviction occurs, the subject can have the arrest record expunged. It is not at all unusual, or difficult, for criminals to have their convictions expunged. Another requirement for an arrest or conviction to be included in NCIC is that the fingerprints taken at the time of the arrest be accepted and classified. If fingerprints are rejected because they were of poor quality to be classified, that particular arrest and conviction will not find its way to a permanent criminal record.
Many law-enforcement agencies subscribe to commercial database services, such as LexusNexis and Accurint, that aggregate data from a wide variety of sources such as public records, death records, tax records, and credit reporting agencies. Law enforcement has greater access than commercial companies that might use the Accurint database in the course of job applicant screening.
We can tell you from our own experience that we run some services, which shall remain unnamed, for investigative purposes, and there is no guarantee they will have accurate criminal information. We have seen situations where registered sex offenders did not even show up.
An individual would have to agree, in writing, to a criminal history check by an online service. But again, depending on where that information is being accessed, it is very possible that criminal activity is likely to not be disclosed. Even in this day and age of information sharing, many law-enforcement agencies maintain their own, separate records on every person they have contact with. This information is only shared with other law-enforcement agencies during the course of an investigation, or if someone signs a release to allow their local and NCIC records to go to a potential employer or the military upon application.
Local police contact records are just that—local to the police department providing them. What one town or city provides will not include what the next town over has; therefore, it is easy for someone’s real criminal profile to be completely missed. Only law enforcement can provide these records. Online dating services cannot. If someone’s NCIC record is checked, this has to be documented with a report number by the local police agency requesting it—along with the reason why it was run—because this information is regularly audited by the FBI. Only trained personnel from a law-enforcement agency who have been granted access to NCIC by the state agency who runs it (generally the state police) can run a “Triple I” (Interstate Identification Index). This information is not accessible by the private sector or the public. Each time a record is run, the requesting agency must account for the request, referencing a case number. The agency then must keep a current log of all checks run. The state agency heading NCIC in a particular state is the only authorized agency allowed to run a criminal record check for employment screening. The potential employee must have signed a release authorizing the prospective employer to request the criminal check.
For any commercial online dating service to do a thorough criminal history check is simply impossible. Even State Boards of Education that screen potential teaching applicants do so through the state police, who, with the appropriate release forms, then run the applicant through the NCIC database.
Our biggest concern with this new law and with any online dating service that claims to run background checks, including criminal history checks, is that it creates a false sense of security for those who might use the service.
Another key point to keep in mind is that just because someone has not been arrested or convicted does not mean that person does not have some dark behavioral secret. Look at Ted Bundy—this charismatic charmer killed for years before he was caught. A criminal record check as criteria on a dating website would not have been helpful to potential dates if he had decided to become a member of eHarmony, Match.com, or True.com! The crime is committed before a person is caught, arrested, and convicted; therefore, never assume that “no criminal history” means no deviant behavior. Remember the movie Stripes, with Bill Murray and his classic line when he was being interviewed to enlist in the Army? Murray’s character was asked whether he had ever been convicted of a crime. Murray replies with a mischievous grin, “Convicted? No, never convicted…”.
We’re barraged with commercials and ads for popular dating websites such as Match.com and eHarmony. Around the world, busy adults with demanding professional lives and little spare time are filling out profiles to find their perfect match. One no longer needs to sit at a bar with friends and hope that Mr. or Ms. Wonderful will appear in between Cosmopolitans and Appletinis.
We all know people who have met the love of their life through dating websites. Yet despite many success stories, there are also stories of not-so-happy endings.
We’re not discouraging anyone from trying to find love online, but when you give out personal information in the hopes of finding love, real caution needs to be exercised.
Dating on the Internet is no more safe than meeting someone at a bar or through a friend. The package may be impressive, the first interaction may be positive, and the profile may make the potential date sound promising. However, you are not always getting what you see at first glance.
Every time we hear Brad Paisley’s song “Online”—the one where the actor who played George Costanza on Seinfeld is the protagonist in the music video—we laugh. It is funny, but it is also disturbingly accurate, describing an overweight, middle-aged man with asthma who has never done well with women, but who can become a completely different person on his MySpace account.
Paisley talks about how the character in this song is really nothing to write home about, but when he goes down into his parents’ basement and logs into his MySpace page, he becomes a good-looking, talented, successful, and wealthy ladies’ man. This may be an exaggeration of sorts, but truth be told, people lie online because they can be something they are not, appear cooler or more successful than they are, and find someone who will believe it all. Often the “lies” are not so blatant; however, even those subtle pieces of “misinformation” could be significant in the big scheme of things. Remember that the person with whom you are interacting is a stranger. That stranger may wind up being the best thing that ever happened to you, or not. Either way, you must be perceptive, smart, and savvy about the people you meet online and allow into your life.
We have worked several cases involving dating sites where women became victims of their date. Two cases specifically come to mind involving educated, professional, intelligent women who took what they thought were the right precautions before going on what became the “date from hell”. There is a misconception that those friendly, benign conversations online make someone less of a stranger and more of a friend than the person who slips you his or her phone number at a party or bar.???
Time, with any case investigation, is of the essence; however, it is extremely common for victims to delay reporting a crime, if they even report it at all. One of the common reasons for this delay is that they are embarrassed and feel as though they let themselves become victimized. Women report feeling stupid about letting someone take advantage of them, and they lay the blame on themselves. We continually tell them that the only one to blame is the criminal.??????
One of the biggest problems in these cases is that there is usually no DNA evidence (particularly in a consensual encounter) and no witness in the room at the time that the crime happens. These cases need to be built based on “he said, she said” statements and circumstantial evidence. Combine that with the issue of a victim being too embarrassed to report the incident—along with society’s view that a woman should not put herself in a position of being victimized by someone she has met online—and it’s no wonder few of these cases are prosecuted. To add insult to injury (because there is always injury whenever someone is victimized, even if it’s just the psychological trauma), when alcohol gets thrown into the mix, the common reaction is, “What did she think was going to happen when she went out with the guy, consumed alcohol, and then went back to his place?”
What many people fail to realize is that alcohol is often deliberately used as the “weapon” by predators. In many states, intoxication of a victim makes a woman incapable of giving consent, thus allowing charges to be filed. The problem is that an intoxicated victim often means very sketchy details for the investigation.
An investigator can interview friends, witnesses, bartenders, taxi drivers, and other passers-by; however, only the two involved actually know what happened during the sexual activity. These cases depend on putting enough pieces together to convince a jury that a woman was sexually violated against her will—often without physical evidence. Most often the perpetrator will admit that sexual activity happened, but will insist it was consensual. The victim will insist she was forced.
Even with an articulate, emotionally stable victim who is willing to testify, the weight of proof falls more on the victim. The suspect never has to take the stand, whereas the victim does. The victim’s life is an open book and a cut-throat defense attorney will attack her to lessen her credibility with a jury. The victim is often revictimized by the very system set up to hold the bad guy accountable. The victim is put in a position where she questions herself and blames herself for what happened.???
We recommend that all potential online daters heed the following list of precautions when using an online dating service:
• Trust your instincts. After the fact, so many women say, “I had a feeling about him”. We believe that women need to listen to that inner voice or gut feeling first and foremost. They don’t call it “women’s intuition” for nothing! (Men, this point is directed at you as well, so don’t dismiss it.)
• Never reveal personal information prior to meeting someone in person. Don’t disclose where you work or what gym you belong to.
• Protect your personal email address. Most online dating services provide email services within their community that afford protection from tracing. Stick with these services for as long as possible. If need be, create a separate account with vague information to use specifically for online dating.
• If you need to provide a phone number to a potential date, use your cell phone number. Cell phone numbers are less easily traced and can be changed with relative ease. Do not use your home phone number, especially if it is publicly listed. Better to take the other person’s phone number and advise that you will call him or her. If you do not have a private number, dial *67 (check with your local phone service) before dialing the number. This generally blocks your outbound Caller ID information for just that call.
• Always advise a trusted friend or family member where you are going and when you expect to be back. Provide this person with the profile information of the person you are meeting.
• Meet in a public place!
• If you have a drink with a date, never leave that drink unattended. Readily available drugs can easily be slipped into a drink unbeknownst to the victim that can render you powerless to fight off an attacker. If you have to run to the ladies room, finish your drink first or bring it with you.
• Use your head and do not assume anything you see on the Internet is true!