Decriminilizing domestic violence

[Kaylee]

You know, your discourse is exactly why men are often laughed at when they go to the police to make a deposition. The men think it's laughable that he could not defend himself against a woman and the women just keep in mind other women who feel powerless in front of a man.

This.

I had a coworker several years ago who was a domestic violence victim. We worked in a prison, and the few times he mentioned it or came to work with visible injuries, he was pretty much put down and teased for it, with people telling him a "real man" wouldn't put up with that sort of treatment. His wife partially kept him over a barrel because they had children and she promised him if he ever fought back or filed charges she would accuse him of abusing her, which would have cost him his job, and take the kids and make sure he'd never see them. A few of us assured him she couldn't get away with that, until he missed work because of broken bones in his face and serious burns (frying pan with grease). Before he got off medical leave, he was under investigation and lost his job - he pressed charges and she said he threatened her and claimed self defense.

Some of us really wondered what the real situation was after that. We'd seen him with injuries, and knew he could have defended himself, so it seemed probable that he didn't hit her, but there's always that nagging doubt because people picture DV as "adult man beats adult woman". About a year after this, she made the news - he was loading belongings into a truck to leave and she walked out in the yard and shot him. She tried to claim self-defense then, but the scenario made it hard and she got charged, plus her own son testified against her and claimed that she would abuse both him and her husband, so she tried for an insanity defense instead. I don't remember the exact outcome, but she was convicted of manslaughter instead of murder and the sentence was something like 10-12 years.

[CanadianHippie]

Not only that, but it was never a "but what about the men" argument, it was pointing out that men also suffer from the same thing. As others have pointed out, there's a real lack of resources to help men, and sexist, patriarchal attitudes also hurt men who are in this situation. This isn't like the "but white people experience racism too" arguments that turn the real situation around so you don't focus on who is really the victim, this is something where both men and women can suffer from the same thing. No one is ignoring women and the fact that most victims are women, it's just that we don't have to limit who we can feel sympathy for.

Right, it should be about the victim.

[Letgo]

Abuse is abuse, regardless of which sex inflicts it or is victimized by it.

I was on a domestic violence case jury once and the prosecutor said that it is the most difficult type of case in which to win a conviction. If she was correct, that may be partially why they want to decriminalize it. I don't think that makes it okay, though. If it would be a crime if done against a stranger, then it should be a crime if done to a family member. Or to a significant other.

[flojo]

Right, it should be about the victim.

Agreed.

[Alecto]

So an update on the original story:

http://cjonline.com/news/2011-10-11/cit ... pWP4d4r2so

It seems that this move to decriminalize DV in Topeka was done to force the county to prosecute, instead of dumping DV cases on the city prosecutor since now it will be governed by stricter state laws. It seems this is becoming less about domestic violence and more about petty infighting between various governmental agencies.

[mirele]

So an update on the original story:

http://cjonline.com/news/2011-10-11/cit ... pWP4d4r2so

It seems that this move to decriminalize DV in Topeka was done to force the county to prosecute, instead of dumping DV cases on the city prosecutor since now it will be governed by stricter state laws. It seems this is becoming less about domestic violence and more about petty infighting between various governmental agencies.

I see a District Attorney who, faced with a 10 percent cut, thought he'd do something smart by shoving off misdemeanor offenses usually handled by his office to the city, because the city adopted the Uniform Public Offense Code who knows how long ago. "Oh yeah, they can prosecute these." And the city was having none of that. I would have to agree with the city. Every place I've ever lived, the county DA has prosecuted crimes like this, and the city handles things like traffic tickets, which carry a fine but no jail time. Cities are simply not set up to prosecute DV complaints or many other misdemeanor offenses.

[Rosa]

It's not petty, though - all these budget cuts, at every level (our state government decided to renege on longstanding agreements where cities get budget subsidies in return for going along with state tax schemes to draw in business, among other things) cause people to fall through the cracks. And the argument isn't about effectiveness, it's about who has to bear the budget cost. It's disgusting.