How to Organize Answers:
1. For Specific DV case
a. Best for Survivor & Children (laws)
i. Standards for Representing Victim
ii. Criminal –
1. Fed laws & state laws (VAWA, long arm statutes, hearsay exceptions of state/feds)
2. law enforcement, (response and suing police/town)
4. Defending victims
iii. Protective orders – jurisdiction, which type, what to fill out
iv. Civil /Family – custody/visitation, support, RO
vii. Legislative Actions
b. Best for Abuser
2. For Society (in order)
a. Correct Social Issues
b. Individual needs
c. Psychology at plan in the law
d. Help outside the law
History / Private Matter (cases: Bradley, OJ Simpson, ):
1. Husband retained right to discipline wife
2. Women were regarded as property that must be controlled (father then husband)
3. Provocation permitted abuse, “thumb rule”
4. DV stems from (religion, gender roles, culture, poor ability to handle anger, personal issues…)
5. Family/DV as a Private Matter
a. BRADLEY v. STATE: Facts: husband abuses wife. Court dislikes behavior of husband, but finds this is ok because state doesn’t want to get involved in domestic issues
b. OJ Simpson Trial: DV was thrown into spotlight, huge increase in laws and legislation.
6. Focus has been to reform Ciminal Justice, BUT there also needs to be focus on Civil
1. Very limited funds means that organizations are fighting to get money, from each other even.
2. Agencies are skeptical to criticize funding because they don’t want to be cut
3. Very limited on what is funded (can restrict organizations type of aide)
1. Because of “private matter” focus, DV was not considered a “real” crime. Ex, hitting a stranger would get you prison time, but hitting your wife would not.
2. Recognizing DV (power and control)
a. Coercion and Threats
b. Using intimidation
c. Emotional Abuse
e. Minimizing, Denying, and blaming
f. Using children
g. Using male privilege
h. Economic abuse
3. Continuum of Abuse: common aggression àHigh conflict (lacks fear)à Abuse à Battering (abuser intends harm) à Terrorism/Stalking (regular abuse, thought out threats, more psychological abuse).
4. Abuser healing process: encourage deeper understand of why they abuse, and why it’s bad – not meeting their real goals and desires.
a. Taught to listen
i. Watch for denial, recognize safety issues
b. Understand impact of DV
c. Generating Trust in the parties (victim and perp)
i. Not being judgmental
ii. Setting up a safe environment
d. Explain what they are doing
i. Explain order
ii. Explain R.O. – make them understand enforcement & consequences
e. Be engaged and ask specific questions
i. Look for specific details – particularly around visitation plans, ensure that you are addressing all the issues around the case
f. Having control of the courtroom
i. Prepare for intimidation and threats
ii. Look where respondents sit
iii. Zero tolerance policy.
iv. Look at security issues
DV Courts with related caseload :
· Integrated DV Court
o (look at parties and putting together criminal and civil matters).
· Unified Family Court
o Just family matter
if vic was required to retreat).
8. Avoid double arrest – makes it very hard for prosecution and immigration issues
d. Police Reports:
i. Collect additional evidence, call victim advocate, detectives should clean up the report,
ii. Don’t move evidence
iii. May have special DV forms for police
iv. Note relationship of parties
v. All info is discoverable by defense (address, witnesses addresses…)
vi. Document ALL statements, write them down verbatim, If you can, have the victim initial, sign, or both at the bottom of the statement.
e. Suing the Police:
i. Major issues:
1. Post-Deshaney = higher standard
2. Police/government immunity
3. Need to establish gross negligence.
4. Failure to train: “deliberate indifference to the rights of persons with whom the police come into contact.” — must also show that the injury incurred “resulted from city’s policy or not adequately training.”
1. Tort – against department or individual officers or towns. Issue: government immunity.
2. State Constitutional Claim – benefit, broader remedies
Injunctive Relief – could be class action, emphesis on