Complaint Investigation Report

D1 then stated that D1’s interview with R1 revealed that the sexual encounter was mutual. R2, when interviewed, initially denied any incident but later also described the encounter as consensual. D1 noted R2’s frustration during the interview. D1 ultimately concluded that there was insufficient evidence to continue the investigation, which lead D1 to end their investigation.

Through interview with R1, R1 stated that R1 was uncertain about the details of the alleged incident due to short-term memory loss. R1 neither confirmed nor denied the occurrence. Additionally, R1 reported feeling safe in the care home and described both Administrator, Zully Six (AD) and S1, as kind and supportive. Furthermore, R1 stated that neither S1 nor R2 had made inappropriate comments toward R1, nor had R2 engaged in any romantic or sexual behavior with R1.

Based on record reviews, multiple staff members (S2-S8) provided written statements indicating that they had never witnessed any inappropriate physical contact or interactions between R1 and R2. Several staff members noted that R1 and R2 frequently argued and had minimal interactions outside of these disagreements. Additionally, some staff members observed that R1 had a history of making inappropriate sexual comments and advances toward both clients and staff. Review of staff written statements also indicated that R1 had invited R2 into R1’s room on multiple occasions, but there was no confirmation that R2 accepted these invitations. One staff member (S6) reported that R1 had disclosed a consensual encounter with R2 but was concerned about R1’s ex finding out. Further, a handwritten statement from unnamed client detailed similar behavior by R1, indicating a pattern of initiating sexual interactions rather than being coerced into them.

Based on the information provided by law enforcement, staff, and R1, there is no preponderance of evidence to support the claim that R1 was forced to engage in sexual acts with R2 against their will. The investigation by D1 was closed due to lack of evidence, and multiple accounts suggest that R1 has previously engaged in and initiated consensual sexual discussions and behaviors. As a result, the allegation is determined to be UNSUBSTANTIATED.

A finding of unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened the preponderance of evidence does not prove it.