Recantation should/should not be used to unfund an investigation?

• A. SHOULD NEVER
• B. SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO STOP AN INVESTIGATION
• C. SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO CLOSE A CASE
• D. SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO UNFUND AN INVESTIGATION

Answer: (A)

Recantation should not be used to unfund an investigation because a victim’s recantation does not wipe away the potential for evidence, safety concerns, or accountability. In victim-centered practice, people under threat or trauma may retract statements for many reasons—fear, coercion, pressure, or memory distress—yet other evidence can still support or clarify what happened. Investigators should continue pursuing the case, assess credibility with care, and gather corroborating details (additional witnesses, physical or digital evidence, timelines) to protect the victim and pursue justice. Funding decisions must reflect the investigative needs and available evidence, not hinge on a single recantation. Prematurely unfunding undermines safety, erodes trust in the system, and can allow offenders to avoid accountability.