The following story was reported by The Utah Investigative Journalism Project in partnership with KSL.com.

PROVO — When “Emily” got the letter from the court about her case, it was almost too late. The court sent it to an old address she hadn’t used for years since she was a freshman at Brigham Young University. By the time it was forwarded to her new address, she had almost lost the chance to speak out against the proposal by the man accused of assaulting her to have his criminal record expunged from the courts.

The Utah Investigative Journalism Project is using a pseudonym to protect Emily’s identity, as she was one of the alleged victims of Nathan Fletcher, who was charged with groping multiple women on the BYU campus in 2014. Fletcher maintained his innocence but entered into a diversion agreement, meaning the charges would be dismissed after 18 months if he fulfilled certain requirements.

The letter from the court provided her with an email where she could register her objection to the proposed expungement. So, she did.

She never heard anything back.

In 2017, she was out for a run in Provo when she noticed a man jog past her whom she hadn’t recognized before in the neighborhood. As she kept running, she realized that the man had turned around and was now running to catch up with her.

When she stopped at an intersection to catch her breath, the man sprinted up to her and said, “Wow, you were so fast. I was trying to catch you but couldn’t keep up with you.”

When she looked up, she said she realized it was Fletcher.

Shocked and dumbfounded, she met with her lawyer that day and learned the court had agreed to expunge his record. She had been left in the dark. Again.

“I genuinely feel so gutted about the entire process in hindsight,” Emily said. “I felt completely left out of the loop and also so vastly unequipped and unable to meaningfully be involved and make sound decisions.”

Emily is far from the only survivor of domestic or sexual violence who has felt left behind by the justice system.

Previous reporting by the Utah Investigative Journalism Project shows Utah police are often trained on an outdated model of domestic violence. That, coupled with other gaps in the system — such as how victims are notified about updates in their case — can have damaging consequences for survivors of sexual violence.

In one instance, a woman said she was not notified about testifying in a case against her abuser. She only learned charges had been dropped when reporters notified her. The man went on to kidnap his ex’s three children. In another case, a woman pleaded with prosecutors to pursue her sexual assault case. When prosecutors motioned to dismiss the case, however, they told the judge they were doing so based on the victim’s request.

The state does have some systems in place to loop in victims, but in each of these cases, the women reported feeling left out of the justice process and in the dark about what was happening in their case.

One solution? Modernizing and beefing up those notification systems. Doing so could make a substantive difference for victims, said Rep. Tyler Clancy, R-Provo, a special victims unit detective for the Provo Police Department. He acknowledged that the justice system could be better about informing victims.

“I think most people in the system that are either prosecutors or law enforcement, they want to do right by victims. It just can become overwhelming, and when those things slip through the cracks, that’s when people really get hurt,” Clancy said. “Sex crimes can be very daunting to come forward, especially when victims know or they had a friend who says, ‘Hey, when I reported, this is what didn’t happen’ — that tamps down on reporting it and it makes our communities less safe.”

The legal landscape

Utah has laws codifying victims’ rights, including a clear explanation of legal proceedings and their role in the process, as well as timely notifications about court hearings.

Holly Johnson, housing coordinator at the Refuge Utah, has over 30 years of experience in victim advocacy. She said victims’ rights laws have been crucial.

“When you’re a victim of domestic violence, a lot of things have been taken away from you. You feel like you don’t have control. Your life has changed, usually drastically,” she said. “All of these notifications are helpful to victims. Just to know what’s going on, it validates victims.”

Beyond just knowing their role in a case, those kinds of notifications also let victims create a safety plan, such as planning a relocation if they know in advance that their abuser is being released from jail, Johnson said.

Deputy state court administrator Neira Siaperas said Utah courts currently rely on prosecutors to notify victims about developments in their case. However, that system is complicated by the fact that, in many cases, only a victim’s name is shared with the judiciary, making direct communication challenging.

Details about a court case are also accessible on Xchange, the state’s public, online court case search system. But victims aren’t always aware the site exists.

The Utah Supreme Court is also considering expanding MyCourtCase — an online tool that allows users to receive hearing notifications and access case history and documents. The tool is currently only available to parties in a case (in criminal cases, victims aren’t usually a party since the charges are brought by prosecutors). Public comment for the change closed in May, and the court reported receiving only two comments, one of which was from a judge.

If the court approves the expansion, victims of qualifying cases, including those involving domestic and sexual violence, could use MyCourtCase. The court is expected to make a decision as early as Aug. 20, with any expansion likely happening in February 2026.

“The judiciary recognizes the important rights afforded to victims under the Utah Constitution and state law, and is working to offer services that are responsive to victims’ needs, including the use of trauma-informed practices,” Siaperas said.

Customized solutions

Outside of the court’s tools, victims can also register online for VINE, a free automated notification service for victims. Utah is one of 40 states that uses the service.

VINE was launched in response to the 1993 murder of Mary Byron, a Kentucky woman who was killed by her ex-boyfriend shortly after he was released from jail for raping and stalking her. Byron had requested to be alerted when he was released from custody. She was never notified.

Today, VINE offers notifications for a variety of steps within the justice system process, including incidents and investigations, changes in custody, court case updates and protective orders.

“This provides county and state agencies with a customizable set of solutions so they can choose what best meets the needs of their communities,” said a spokesperson for Equifax, VINE’s parent company. “The VINE solution is designed to be highly configurable on the back end to adapt to the unique needs of each state while providing a consistent, user-friendly experience for victims who rely on it.”

In Utah, VINE only offers updates for custody changes, such as when an individual is paroled, booked into jail or discharged from probation, according to Karen Tapahe, a spokesperson for the Utah Department of Corrections.

Connecticut, in contrast, appears to have one of the most comprehensive VINE offerings in the country, with notification options ranging from probation violations, upcoming court hearings, the outcome of the case, pending parole hearings and custody changes.

Marc Pelka, deputy director of Connecticut’s Judicial Branch Office of Victim Services, said implementing VINE is complex since state and local criminal justice systems vary across the country.

“I would imagine that VINE looks very different in each of the states where it is operating,” Pelka said. “There is no one-size-fits-all as best I can tell; it truly comes down to collaborative effort between the state and the provider.”

The fact that Connecticut doesn’t have counties, for example, likely made it easier for the state to adopt VINE since its corrections department and courts are largely unified, he added.

Prior to using VINE, Connecticut had other notification systems, including snail mail and email. But the switch, Pelka said, has been beneficial for victims, who can now control their preference for getting notifications (app, text message, automated phone message, email or assistance for people who are deaf or hearing impaired).

“There are features to VINE that make the system more accessible and simpler for victims because they are able to log into the VINE website 24/7, 365 days and register for notifications,” Pelka said. “It empowers them.”

Equifax declined to provide an interview about how it works with states to customize each state’s VINE offerings.

Possible changes

Clancy said that while most victims do receive notifications via snail mail, the state needs to look at modernizing that system.

“The letter of the law? Sure, yeah, we’re sending a letter in the mail,” he said. “But we need to live up to the spirit of the law in terms of the Crime Victims Bill of Rights. … I think we can take it to the next level and really help people feel supported in the system.”

Clancy ran a bill in 2024 focusing on crime victims’ rights, including creating a process to submit complaints regarding victims’ rights violations. Clancy said the top complaint from victims leading up to the legislation was confusion about the justice system process and miscommunication.

“When you look at other places in government, we have modernized so many things, like driver’s license registration, going to pay a utility bill — you can do it all on your phone now,” he said. “I think the criminal justice system is just this large beast of trying to turn a battleship around.”

Johnson, with the Refuge Utah, said that while tech updates would be helpful — especially if it’s not safe for a victim to receive a physical letter at home — that change needs to be paired with a human element.

“VINE is not going to tell you what a prosecutor is doing or what a judge is doing or things like that,” she said. “Really, to help a victim, we want to get them in touch with the prosecutor. If they don’t have an advocate for some reason, then I always say, call their assistant. Call the prosecution’s assistant, somebody to get what you really expect out of the case.”

In Utah County, for example, she said victim advocates in law enforcement and prosecution collaborate frequently and work on cases together to make sure the victim is involved and empowered.

“We’re evolving victim advocacy, the victim rights movement — and sometimes it’s slow; sometimes it’s frustrating that we’re still talking about the same things,” Johnson said. “But I do see progress, and I do think in general, prosecutors and police officers are so much more educated than they were years and years ago about victims’ rights and they are more considerate of telling victims what’s going to happen.”

If you support the work we do and believe in the power of a free and independent press, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to The Utah Investigative Journalism Project by visiting utahinvestigative.org/donate.