The Woman Who Saw the Problem
In 1970s Chicago, sexual-assault evidence was not collected through one consistent system. Martha “Marty” Goddard, a victim advocate, recognized that hospitals, police, and laboratories needed a reliable way to collect, document, preserve, and transfer evidence. Working with medical professionals, law enforcement, attorneys, and survivors, she developed the concept and design for a standardized evidence-collection kit. Her goal was practical: if someone came forward and went through a forensic examination, the evidence should be preserved well enough to be investigated.
Black Women Faced a Deeper History
For Black women, distrust of the justice system had deep historical roots. American law had once denied enslaved Black women equal legal protection, and those attitudes did not disappear with slavery. Recy Taylor’s 1944 case showed how racism and sexism could affect whose accusations were taken seriously. Despite a national campaign for justice, her attackers were never prosecuted. A standardized evidence system could not erase that history, but it could help create a more consistent process for preserving evidence.
The Law Was Changing Too Slowly
By the 1970s, laws involving sexual assault were changing, but legal attitudes often changed more slowly. Some jurisdictions had required additional evidence beyond a victim’s testimony, while marital rape exemptions reflected older ideas about consent within marriage. Goddard’s kit could not reform the entire justice system, but it addressed one important weakness: inconsistent evidence collection. Instead of every hospital developing its own procedure, the kit brought supplies, instructions, forms, and documentation into one standardized process.
How the Vitullo Name Became Attached
Goddard eventually worked with Chicago police sergeant and crime-lab analyst Louis Vitullo. Although Goddard developed the concept and design, the finished product became widely known as the Vitullo Evidence Collection Kit. Goddard continued organizing, training, raising money, and encouraging hospitals and police departments to adopt the system. The Playboy Foundation helped finance the early project, and a Chicago-area pilot program began in 1978. The approach soon expanded beyond Chicago and helped influence sexual-assault evidence collection elsewhere.
What the Kit Really Meant
The kit represented more than forensic supplies. A forensic examination can be difficult and stressful, and evidence has little value if it is collected incorrectly, poorly documented, lost, or never tested. Standardization was intended to give the process greater consistency from the examination room to the laboratory. Goddard’s work carried a simple principle: when someone comes forward and provides evidence, institutions have a responsibility to handle that evidence seriously.
Then Came Detroit
That responsibility became painfully clear decades later. In 2009, authorities discovered 11,341 sexual-assault kits in a Detroit police warehouse that had never been submitted for DNA testing. Many had been sitting there for years. When authorities eventually began processing the backlog, the evidence produced investigative leads and connections to suspected serial offenders. The discovery demonstrated that collecting evidence was only the first step. A perfectly designed kit accomplishes little when institutions fail to act on what is inside it.
A National Problem
Detroit was not alone. Untested sexual-assault kits became a problem in jurisdictions across the country, eventually leading to major federal efforts to inventory, test, and investigate old evidence. The problem also exposed weaknesses in tracking because jurisdictions did not always count backlogs in the same way. What became clear was that standardized collection could not solve institutional neglect by itself. Evidence must also be tracked, tested when appropriate, investigated, and treated as part of a functioning justice system.
The Real Story Behind the Invention
The history is more complicated than saying one person simply “invented the rape kit.” Goddard developed the standardized concept and design, Vitullo and the Chicago police laboratory helped turn it into a system law enforcement adopted, and outside funding helped make early implementation possible. But Goddard was the driving force who recognized the problem and worked to create a practical solution. Her contribution deserves to be remembered alongside the name that eventually appeared on the kit.
Every Kit Represents a Person
The most important lesson is easy to lose when discussing statistics and evidence. Every untested kit represents someone who came forward and trusted institutions to take the evidence seriously. When thousands of kits sit untouched, the failure is not simply administrative. It represents lost time, missed investigative opportunities, and damaged trust. Goddard helped build a better way to preserve evidence. Institutions still had to accept responsibility for using it.
Summary
Marty Goddard recognized that sexual-assault evidence needed a consistent system for collection and preservation and developed the concept that became the standardized kit. Louis Vitullo’s name became associated with the finished product, while outside funding helped the project expand. Decades later, massive backlogs of untested kits showed that collecting evidence was never enough. A system only works when institutions follow through.
Conclusion
Marty Goddard’s story is about both innovation and responsibility. She saw a weakness in the justice system and helped create a practical solution, yet later backlogs showed that even the best tool can fail when institutions neglect it. Remembering her contribution means more than restoring credit to a woman whose role became less widely known. It means remembering why the system was created in the first place: when someone comes forward and provides evidence, that evidence deserves to be taken seriously.