Public Remarks on the proposed Special Victims Unit by Sheriff Osborne

Published on October 21, 2026

Special Victims Unit

Public Remarks by Sheriff Derek R. Osborne – Tompkins County Legislature 10/20/26

Good evening, everyone, and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about a proposal that I believe deserves thoughtful consideration by our community, our elected officials, and our law enforcement partners. I was asked by the Tompkins County Legislature to develop a plan for a Special Victims Unit within the Sheriff’s Office dedicated to investigating sexual assault and serious child abuse complaints.

I want to begin by emphasizing something that is central to everything I am about to say: this is a proposal for a service—not a mandate, not a takeover, and not an effort to diminish the work of any other law enforcement agency.

Our goal is to start a conversation about how we can work together to strengthen our response to sexual assault and serious child abuse in Tompkins County.

This is an important conversation, and it deserves to be approached professionally, respectfully, and with an open mind.

Why We Are Having This Conversation

As many of you know, a recent sexual assault investigation involving Cornell University Police received significant public attention and was followed by the District Attorney’s decision not to pursue prosecution at the time.

That case has generated questions and discussion about how sexual assault investigations are conducted, how evidence is evaluated, and how our criminal justice system responds to these allegations.

I want to be very clear about my purpose here tonight.

I am not standing before you to assign blame for the handling of that case. I am not here to criticize the Cornell University Police Department, question the intentions of individual investigators, or second-guess the District Attorney’s decision. There will be plenty of time to do so when the facts are determined.

These are serious investigations involving complex facts, evidence, legal standards, and decisions that must be made by the professionals responsible for them. With that said, concern from our community is certainly understandable and merits open conversation.

My responsibility as Sheriff, however, is to look beyond any one case and ask a broader question:

Is there an opportunity to improve how we coordinate these investigations across Tompkins County, and can we provide additional resources and specialized expertise to the people responsible for conducting them?

I believe that question deserves serious consideration.

Looking at our existing system is not an accusation that someone has failed. It is part of our responsibility to continually evaluate our practices, identify opportunities for improvement, and make sure our public safety services meet the needs of the people we serve.

That is the spirit in which I prepared this proposal and the spirit in which the Legislature asked me to prepare it.

Understanding Our Countywide System

Tompkins County has a diverse law enforcement structure.

We have the Tompkins County Sheriff’s Office, the Ithaca Police Department, several village police departments, the New York State Police, Cornell University Police, Ithaca College Public Safety, and Tompkins-Cortland Community College Public Safety.

Each agency has its own jurisdiction, responsibilities, policies, staffing, and resources. Each also brings valuable experience and knowledge of the communities it serves.

This decentralized structure provides residents, students, and visitors with multiple ways to seek help and report crimes.

But it also may present challenges, particularly when we are dealing with crimes that are complex, sensitive, and exceptionally demanding on investigators.

Sexual assault and serious child abuse investigations can require extensive interviews, medical and forensic examinations, digital evidence analysis, search warrants, witness follow-up, coordination with prosecutors, and months of investigative work.

These cases require specialized training, time, experience, and consistent attention to detail.

A smaller police department may not have an investigator dedicated exclusively to these offenses. A larger department may have experienced investigators but still face competing demands for personnel and resources.

And even when every agency is working diligently, differences in procedures, case management, evidence handling, and investigative resources can make coordination, and overall results, more difficult.

The question is not whether our agencies care about these cases. They do.

The question is whether we can make specialized investigative resources more accessible and establish a more coordinated approach when these cases arise.

That is the purpose of the proposed Special Victims Unit.

What I Am Proposing

The plan I have prepared proposes establishing a specialized Special Victims Unit, or SVU, within the Tompkins County Sheriff’s Office.

The proposed unit would focus on qualifying sexual assault and serious child abuse investigations throughout the county.

It would be staffed by a dedicated lieutenant, five criminal investigators, an investigator assigned specifically to evidence and forensic services, and a civilian clerk to support case coordination and administration.

The proposal also envisions a dedicated prosecutor assigned by the District Attorney’s Office and a victim advocate provided by the Advocacy Center of Tompkins County embedded with the unit.

The idea is straightforward: instead of relying exclusively on investigators who must divide their attention among many different types of criminal cases, we would create a team whose primary responsibility is these specialized investigations.

That team could develop focused expertise, receive specialized training, establish consistent investigative procedures, and maintain dedicated resources for evidence collection and preservation.

It could also provide smaller agencies with access to investigative capabilities that may otherwise be difficult for them to maintain on their own.

This would be an additional service available to help address a countywide need.

It is not a suggestion that other agencies lack capable investigators. Nor does it mean that every agency should abandon the investigative responsibilities it currently performs.

Rather, it creates an opportunity to pool expertise, coordinate resources, and determine whether a specialized countywide model can provide benefits that are difficult to achieve when agencies work independently.

This Is About Collaboration, Not Taking Over

I want to spend some time on this point because it is essential to understanding the proposal.

I am not proposing that the Sheriff’s Office simply order every police department in Tompkins County to turn over its sexual assault investigations. Such a hardnosed stance never works!

I recognize that each agency has its own responsibilities, established relationships, and operational considerations. Any countywide model must respect applicable law, address legitimate concerns, and be developed in consultation with the agencies choosing to participate.

The plan specifically envisions a cooperative partnership—not an effort by one agency to take over another agency’s cases.

For example, Cornell University Police have extensive knowledge of their campus, their community, their operations, and the people they serve. That knowledge is valuable. It should be part of any collaborative model involving cases connected to Cornell.

The same principle applies to the Ithaca Police Department, our village police departments, the State Police, and our other campus public safety partners.

Under the proposal, we could explore having investigators from participating agencies assigned to, or embedded within, the SVU through formal agreements. They could bring their experience and institutional knowledge to the team while helping coordinate investigations.

The Sheriff’s Office would provide the organizational home and operational leadership for the proposed unit. A designated Sheriff’s Office investigator would serve as the lead investigator for cases accepted by the SVU, consistent with the agreements and applicable law.

But the details of how agencies participate, which cases are referred, how assignments are made, and how disagreements are resolved must be worked out collaboratively before implementation.

Participation, responsibilities, and case referrals must be clearly defined, not assumed.

This is why the plan calls for a formal planning group, legal review, written protocols, and interagency agreements.

I want our partners involved in designing a system that works in practice, not presented with a finished arrangement that ignores their concerns.

I also want to be clear that the proposal does not itself create a legal obligation for every agency to transfer its cases. It is a framework for discussion, planning, and potential agreements. The precise authority and responsibilities of each participating agency must be reviewed and established before the model moves forward.

If an agency has concerns, we should hear them, discuss them, and address them.

That is how effective partnerships are built.

What Would Change for Victims?

At the center of this proposal is the person who has experienced sexual assault or serious abuse.

Regardless of which agency initially receives a report, a victim deserves to be treated with dignity, patience, professionalism, and respect.

They deserve to have their concerns taken seriously. They deserve an investigation that is thorough, timely, and professionally conducted. And they deserve to understand what is happening, who is responsible for contacting them, and where they can turn for support.

Today, victims may interact with multiple professionals and organizations as their cases move forward. Coordination between those professionals is important, but it can also be difficult for a victim to navigate.

A coordinated SVU model would seek to reduce unnecessary duplication, avoid asking victims to repeat their experiences more often than necessary, and establish a clearer point of contact throughout the investigative process.

More importantly, available statistics show that when our universities receive a sexual assault complaint, a disproportionate number are received by Title IX rather than law enforcement. We need to look at why this is and ask ourselves if the creation of a professional Special Victim’s Unit will increase the likelihood of a victim reporting their complaint to law enforcement, which will ultimately lead to a review by the DA’s office.

An SVU would also strengthen coordination with the Advocacy Center of Tompkins County, Child Protective Services, medical providers, and other professionals who serve victims and families.

The Advocacy Center already plays an important role in our county through its victim services and the longstanding Multidisciplinary Team/Sexual Assault Investigation Team framework.

That existing partnership is an important foundation. We are not starting from scratch.

The proposed SVU would build upon those relationships and seek to make the investigative component of the response more coordinated.

It is also important to understand that these organizations have different responsibilities. Law enforcement investigates potential crimes. Child Protective Services addresses child safety and protective services matters. The Advocacy Center provides victim advocacy. Medical professionals provide medical care and forensic services. Prosecutors independently evaluate cases and make prosecutorial decisions.

The goal is not to erase those distinctions. It is to improve how the different parts of the system work together.

A more coordinated process cannot guarantee a particular outcome in any case. No investigative model can make that promise.

BUT… we can work toward a process that provides consistent investigative attention, better evidence coordination, clearer communication, and stronger support for victims.

Those are worthwhile goals regardless of the outcome of any individual investigation.

Why Specialized Investigations Matter

Sexual assault and serious child abuse cases are not always straightforward.

Evidence may be available from multiple sources. Witnesses may be difficult to locate. Digital records may need to be preserved quickly. Forensic testing may take time. Victims may need support before they feel ready to participate in an interview.

Investigators must be able to recognize the evidence that may be available, understand the legal requirements for obtaining it, and follow investigative leads carefully.

A dedicated evidence and forensic services investigator, as proposed in this plan, would help coordinate evidence collection, preserve chain of custody, track forensic submissions, and identify outstanding evidence needs.

A dedicated SVU supervisor would be responsible for case assignments, investigative review, training, and coordination with prosecutors and participating agencies.

These resources would be intended to make the investigative process more consistent and accountable.

The unit would also provide an opportunity to evaluate its own performance. We could track investigative timeliness, case progress, evidence coordination, interagency cooperation, workload, and victim experience, while protecting confidential information.

Over time, that information could help us identify what is working, where improvements are needed, and whether the investment is achieving its intended purpose.

That is how we should approach public safety initiatives: establish clear objectives, evaluate results, and remain willing to improve the model.

Respecting the District Attorney’s Role

I also want to address the role of the District Attorney.

The proposed SVU is an investigative model. It is not a proposal to change the District Attorney’s independent authority to determine whether criminal charges should be pursued.

Investigators gather and evaluate evidence, conduct interviews, follow leads, and prepare cases for prosecutorial review.

Prosecutors assess the evidence and applicable law and exercise their independent judgment regarding prosecution.

Those are distinct responsibilities, and they must remain distinct.

A specialized unit could improve the consistency of investigative preparation and the coordination between investigators and prosecutors. It could also create opportunities for earlier consultation about investigative needs and evidentiary questions.

But no unit can guarantee that a case will result in an arrest, criminal charges, or a conviction.

Our obligation is to pursue thorough, impartial, and professionally sound investigations, and to respect the independent decisions made by the professionals responsible for each stage of the process.

What Happens Next?

This plan is a proposal. It is not a final implementation decision.

Before moving forward, I believe we need a structured planning process that brings together the Tompkins County Legislature, the Sheriff’s Office, the District Attorney’s Office, the County Attorney, Child Protective Services, the Advocacy Center, medical and forensic partners, and interested law enforcement agencies—including Cornell University Police and other municipal and campus partners.

That group would need to examine the legal framework, the scope of the service, staffing, costs, facilities, information sharing, investigative procedures, case referrals, and the responsibilities of participating agencies.

We would need to develop written agreements and protocols that address those issues and receive the appropriate legal and administrative review.

We would also need to identify the resources required to establish and sustain the unit.

If the plan moves forward, implementation should occur through an agreed-upon process with clear expectations and appropriate oversight.

 I expect there will be different perspectives on the best way to organize this service, and those perspectives should be part of the conversation.

The objective is not to win an argument about which agency should be in charge. It is to determine whether we can build a model that serves our community more effectively.

Closing

I want to return to the reason we are having this conversation.

Sexual violence and serious child abuse affect real people, real families, and our entire community.

The responsibility of responding effectively does not belong to one agency alone.

It belongs to all of us who have accepted the responsibility of public service.

We have talented investigators, dedicated advocates, experienced prosecutors, and committed public safety professionals throughout Tompkins County.

I believe our greatest opportunity is to bring those strengths together.

The question before us should not be which agency gains responsibility or which agency gives something up.

The question is whether the people we serve will be safer, better supported, and better served because we chose to work together.

This proposal offers one possible framework for doing that.

I welcome the perspectives, experience, and participation of every agency and community partner willing to help develop it.

We may not be able to prevent every act of violence.

But we can work together to ensure that when someone comes to harm, our community is prepared to respond with competence, compassion, and continuity of care.

That is the service I am offering. That is the partnership I am inviting. And that is the work I believe is worth doing together.

Thank you.