Is the US Failing Rape Victims?

Alternet asks this question today in what is, frankly, an emotionally exhausting article. That exhaustion, mixed with anger and horror, comes from their coverage of so many recent instances of sexual violence after which victims are being told again and again that their rights don't matter and that their voices won't be heard.

Let's start with two examples from the winter and spring which are in fact on the opposite ends of what the media sees as a "rape spectrum."

First, you have Julian Assange, a powerful man accused of "acquaintance rape," based on two women's accounts. One involved a forcible sexual encounter that began as a consensual one, and another involved penetrating a woman while she was asleep. Both women were sophisticated professionals who knew Assange, and both were alone with him when the alleged assaults took place.

Both women were blamed, smeared and their identities revealed online, accused of being part of a supposed worldwide conspiracy to bring Assange down (just as the press has insinuated that DSK's accuser, Nafissatou Diallo, was an unlikely pawn of a conspiracy to silence Strauss-Kahn).

Second, we have the Texas gang-rape case, in which a large group of boys and men were caught on video brutally and repeatedly gang-raping a young girl. In this case, there was physical corroborating evidence, the victim was too young to legally consent, and the accused were relatively powerless men in a poor community.

The cases couldn't have been more different, and yet in this case also, the young woman was smeared when prominent newspaper stories fixated on her appearance, her dress, and her behavior rather than the demeanor and histories of the men involved.

So the lesson is clear: if you report an unexciting rape that happened in your home while you were alone with the perpetrator, you get blamed. If you are recorded on video being repeatedly raped by a massive number of people, you also get blamed. If you're a grown woman: blamed. If you're a child: blamed. If it's your word: blamed. If there's physical evidence: blamed.

It's clear, then, that the answer is yes, we are failing victims. And we will be until we create a system in which they feel safe to report, because they aren't afraid of being blamed. We will be failing victims until our society understands that lack of consent means rape, period. We will be failing victims until we acknowledge that tricking women into having sex, getting them drunk to lower their inhibitions, or making them feel that saying no isn't an option are all means of raping. And, we will be failing victims until our idea of rape prevention is to teach men not to rape rather than teaching victims to avoid getting victimized. We have a lot of work to do.

Nicki Minaj and Fighting Back

Last week, singer Nicki Minaj was involved in an incident of domestic violence during which, according to the police report, her companion hit her with a suitcase. Minaj chose not to press charges and then denied the account to the media. Taking to Twitter, she said (paraphrasing due to the adult language in the original tweet) people are stupid to believe that a man would hit her and not leave on a stretcher.

We hear a lot of women say that. Some think that domestic violence victims are weak. Others just think that their own self-esteem (or temper) is too high to "put up with" violence used against them. Zerlina Maxwell at TheLoop21 addresses this somewhat (clicking this link takes you to Minaj's original tweet, which contains adult language):

Being the victim of violence doesn’t make you weak. It makes the perpetrator of that violence look weak. Furthermore, Minaj’s insistence that she would have retaliated against the man if she had really been hit is wholly unacceptable.

We need to have a mature conversation around gender violence. It’s not appropriate for anyone to be hit or leave in a stretcher. The automatic response from Minaj should not be one that coincides with her stage image, she is a human being after all. Even if she didn’t want to admit to being hit, a more empowering response could have been “I was not the victim of domestic abuse but if you find yourself in that situation call the police or tell a friend. Get Help!”

Of course, these kinds of comments are dangerous for more reasons than just that violence should not be met with more violence. I talked to a woman literally as I was typing this post who was struggling to admit that her partner was abusive, that it was really all that bad, despite the fact that he has choked her in front of their child and is threatening to kill her. She said that it's hard to believe that it is real because she isn't the "meek" kind of woman that she thought "usually ended up in these situations". We are stereotyping domestic violence victims so much that they now cannot recognize themselves enough to seek help!

There's another reason why this reaction isn't helpful. WRC offers two free classes every month that the local judicial districts call "anger management". Women are mandated by the courts to attend these classes because they have been arrested for family violence. Some of the women in the class genuinely have anger management issues, but most are victims of domestic violence who were arrested for fighting back. Our classes are 1/3 DV support group, 1/3 anger management, and 1/3 instructions for how to avoid future arrests and how to get this one expunged from your record.

In the class, we often show a video about the Framingham 8, a group of 8 women in Framingham, Massachusetts who were imprisoned for killing a spouse or partner after years of domestic violence. Several of those women have since won their freedom by using Battered Women's Syndrome as a defense. We had a woman in class recently, who you will recall was there because she had been arrested for fighting back, who was assaulted again by her partner a few days after the class. She called to tell us that she thinks that video might have saved her life. Instead of fighting back and possibly escalating the violence, getting arrested again, or killing her partner, she just took the abuse. For her, that was her best-case scenario.

It's not a pretty picture, but here we are. How disheartening is it that we are asked to teach classes for victims that instruct them not to fight back or they might go to jail? The unfortunate truth is that many victims of domestic violence do go to jail for fighting back, or for killing their partners, and the effects of that often last longer than the effects of the physical violence. Once you are arrested, it is harder to find a job. While you are in jail, your children might be taken from you (and sometimes even given to your batterer). You are labeled the "aggressor" by the legal system, a label which follows you throughout your interactions with the courts as you later try to press charges or file a protective order. That label also prevents you from receiving services from the court victim advocates and even some domestic violence programs (though certainly not ours). To help women have the best chance of rebuilding their lives after domestic violence, while they are in it, we are encouraged to tell them just to take it.

How can we get to the hard work of ending domestic violence when we have to tell 80ish women per month just to take it?

We are thankful to be able to offer these classes, for free, because instead victims who are arrested would have to pay a more traditional anger management program to treat them like a criminal. We are lucky to have this means of introducing our agency to women who might otherwise never attend a DV support group or hear about our services. We are also disgusted that so many women who don't belong there end up in these classes at all, and we work hard for the day when our community no longer punishes women for the crimes committed against them.

DV SWAT Stand-off in Gwinett

A Gwinett County man committed suicide after a 6-hour SWAT stand-off in Gwinett County.

The incident began with an argument between the man and his wife around midnight, Gwinnett police Cpl. Edwin Ritter said. He said the man threatened to harm himself.

“He told her that he was going to commit suicide. She threatened to leave. He said, ‘No, you’re not going to leave.’ He went and got a long gun,” Ritter told Channel 2’s Amanda Cook.

Ritter said the wife managed to escape with the couple’s teenage daughter and call 911.

When police arrived, they said, the man refused to come out, and they had to take precautions because he’s armed.

“We don't know the power of this gun," Ritter said.

The SWAT team was brought in and neighbors on either side of the house were evacuated. They were speaking to the man over the phone, but he refused to surrender. SWAT officers threw tear gas in the home and sent in a robot. Ritter said authorities would stay at the home as long as necessary.

“We want to make sure that this is going to be a peaceful resolution,” he said.

But, police said, SWAT stormed in after the robot showed the man lying very still. Around 6:30 a.m., they said he died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Ritter's wife and daughter. We are very thankful that they were able to get out alive.

Rape Myths, Part III

Welcome to the third post in our series examining rape myths for Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Click on the number to read posts 1, 2.1, 2.2, & 2.3.

In this post, we'll finally talk about that stat we've been teasing you about, because in this post we shift past the constant focus on victims and actually talk about rapists. Consider this your trigger warning.

The last myth that we talked about in our HLN interview is the myth that rape is just about sex. It's not. In any given sexual encounter, there are countless moments when one can determine whether or not one's partner is consenting. What you are looking for is enthusiastic consent. It should be clear that your partner is ready and willing and excited about where this encounter is going. If your partner is hesitant, confused, or unable to say yes, you haven't received consent. At best, you are coercing them into doing something they would rather say no to (still rape). Probably, you are moving forward explicitly without their consent.

So, in our imaginary encounter, if a person realizes they do not have enthusiastic consent, they have options. They can stop what they are doing and then go find someone else who will consent to have sex with them. They can stop what they are doing and take care of their sexual needs on their own. Though illegal, they can hire someone to consensually provide them with sex. Or, they could just give up on sex at that time, which countless people do every day.

Instead, a rapist decides to move forward anyway. Regardless of what the victim is wearing, regardless of where she has been, regardless of whether she has been drinking, regardless of a host of factors, the responsibility for the rape lies with the rapist, because he is the one making the decision in that moment to move forward.

The problem is, we don't label so much of that scenario as rape. Women come through our doors every day who have been sexually assaulted by husbands or partners, but they don't label it as such. If someone holds you down and forces you to have sex, that is rape. If someone gets you too drunk to say no and then has sex with you, that is rape. If someone talks you into having sex when you initially didn't want to, makes you feel too guilty to say no, or makes you feel too scared to say no, that is rape.

Slightly over 1 in 20 college-age men will admit to raping someone in anonymous surveys, as long as the word "rape" isn't used in the description of the act. If you ask, "have you ever raped a woman", of course they will say no. But if you describe one of the scenarios above (i.e., have you ever made a woman feel too guilty to say no to sex), 6% of men will say yes, they have. And that's a conservative estimate. Other sources double that number.

So why do 6% of men rape? Because they can. If you don't respect women, you don't care if you have their consent. If women are nothing but glorified sex toys to you, you don't care about their enthusiasm or their pleasure. You don't care if they get anything out of the encounter. You don't care if they really want to be there, so long as they are there. If society has taught you that women aren't real people whose feelings and opinions matter, then their feelings and opinions about sex don't matter.

But even with all these factors as true, fewer men would rape if they thought there would be a consequence for doing so. If they thought that it would hurt their relationships with others or their careers, if they thought the would be arrested, if they thought that some privilege or power that they value would be taken from them as punishment, they wouldn't rape. It is a choice. Men are not neanderthals who are ruled by their libidos. 94% of men make the decision not to rape. It is a choice, and if we took rape seriously and punished rapists, it wouldn't happen nearly as often.

Instead, only 6% of rapists ever see a day in jail, which leaves them right out in the world where they can rape again.

Rape Myths Part II, Part III

This is the post that just keeps going. We had intended to write about some other rape myths, and still will, but the universe keeps providing evidence of ways that believing that women lie about being raped can be incredibly damaging to rape victims (as if it weren't already obvious).

Earlier this week, Ms. Magazine told the story of a woman who reported a sexual assault and was deemed by police to be a liar. They went so far as to charge her with false reporting and fine her $500. Turns out, she wasn't lying.

Three years later, Marc O’Leary was arrested in Colorado for charges of sexual assault, kidnapping, burglary and felony menacing. He is being held on $5 million bail. When the police raided O’Leary’s home earlier this month, they found photos of his victims.

The 18-year-old woman from Washington [whom police accused of false reporting] was in those photographs.

Police have reopened her case, reimbursed her $500 and are working on getting her record expunged, but they can't undo the trauma they caused. This young woman was made to look like a liar to her entire community, she was given a criminal record, and she was retraumatized by police and the courts by making her relive her assault and then not believing her. The police also allowed O'Leary to assault two other women, women to whom he would never have had access if he had been behind bars because the police took the original report seriously.

By believing that women commonly lie about rape, we are helping rapists. We help men like O'Leary escape punishment for using violence against women, freeing them to do it again. Remember that the next time you are tempted to be skeptical.

Rape Myths Part II, Part II

Somehow, in writing our last, we missed a great post from Ms. Magazine examining the same myth - that women frequently lie about being sexually assaulted. It is a must-read! Here is an excerpt:

Take the case of Ben Roethlisberger. Back in 2009, the star Steelers quarterback was accused of rape by a Lake Tahoe casino hostess. She filed a civil suit for assault, sexual assault and battery, false imprisonment, false pretenses, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress. She did not press criminal charges, though, which Roethlisberger’s lawyers claimed was evidence that the accusations were false.

However, even judges have said that rape survivors are sometimes better off not reporting to police because the stress of a criminal trial can add even more trauma after a sexual assault. And her hesitation is certainly understandable in this case: When she reported the crime to a casino security guard, he scoffed, “Most girls would feel lucky to get to have sex with someone like Ben Roethlisberger.” Is it possible that a judge and jury might say the same thing?

Almost immediately following reports of the suit, TMZ released alleged photos of the survivor without text. The photos, predictably, were met with comments like this one: “This is a bunch of trumped up bullshit from a gold digging @#$?”

Then, just a few days after the photos were released, the gossip rags dug into the survivor’s mental health history, reporting on her post-assault depression, insomnia and anxiety–and calling her “nutty” rather than recognizing the possible signs of sexual trauma. On blogs and news sites, almost without variation, fans defended their football hero and reporters danced gingerly around the issue.

The assumption hung heavily in the air: She had to be lying. Why would a rich (or, in other cases, married/famous/charitable/kind) man rape a so-called “nobody”?

And here is another interesting follow-up touched on in the Ms. article. The FBI reports that between 2-8% of sexual assaults are unfounded. You'll notice that is higher than the 1.6% that we quoted in our last post and in our HLN interview. That's because the FBI number looks at sexual assault reports that are unfounded, not false. According to the Forensic Examiner, that 2-8% figure is pretty much meaningless.

According to the FBI, a report should only be considered unfounded when investigation revealed that the elements of the crime were not met or the report was "false" (which is not defined) (FBI, 2007).

This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false.

The police department mentioned in the Ms. article (who had an unfounded rate of 54%) went even further and injected a whole host of their own biases in determinations of whether or not a woman reporting a sexual assault was lying. Of course their numbers were inflated if they told the FBI that they believe some women falsely report rape to “obtain revenge” on a man who has “done her wrong,” or to make her partner “feel guilty” after a “lover’s quarrel”! The point is, these numbers are highly subjective and, since we live in a culture that assumes that women lie about being raped, our stats about women lying about rape are going to be inflated. It's a vicious cycle, and one that does not contribute to justice for rape victims.

Rape Myths Part II

This is the second in our series of posts examining rape myths in honor of Sexual Assault Awareness Month. For the first, challenging the idea that women are responsible for their sexual assaults, click here.

Many people believe that false reports of rape are common. There are usually two thoughts processes behind that, both of which are grounded in a system that values men more highly than women.

First, when it comes to date rape, many people assume that the sex or sexual act was consensual at the time, but that the woman wakes up the next morning regretting it and changes her story. This is similar to arguing that a woman lies about consensual sex, calling it rape, when her husband or father finds out and she wants to avoid their disapproval. The entire argument hinges on one belief: women are liars.

If we don't believe that women are liars, we believe that men are actually capable of sexual assault. But, because our society values men more highly than we do women, we have more invested in believing that men are innocent. It is easier for us to believe something negative about a woman than it is for us to believe something negative about a man. It is easier for us to think that the average woman is capable of trying to ruin a man's life by falsely accusing him of a horrible crime than it is for us to think that the average man is capable of raping.

This leads very logically into the next thought process. We want to believe that men who are rapists are easy to identify and thus easy to avoid. It's a form of self-protection, similar to that which causes us to wrongfully believe that women are at least partially responsible for their rapes. But men who rape don't wear signs around their necks or have tattoos that say "dangerous". Men who rape can be creepy or charming, ugly or handsome, young or old, rich or poor, of any race or ethnicity, religious or not religious, etc. These men could be your fathers, husbands, boyfriends, brothers, sons, bosses, faith leaders, or anyone else. But, because we don't want to believe that the men we love and respect could be violent, it is easier for us to think that women are liars. Because we want to think we are safe from sexual assault because we don't know anyone capable of doing something so horrible, it is easier for us to do something horrible - revictimize a sexual assault victim by accusing her of lying.

In reality, false reports are not common. There aren't many studies done on the issue, and thus stats are hard to come by, but some reports have found that false reports of sexual assault are as low as 1.6%. That same study found false reports of auto theft to be 2.6% of total reports.

Compare that to the fact that 1 in 20 college-age men will admit to raping someone in anonymous surveys, as long as the word "rape" isn't used in the description of the act.*

*We'll explore this stat in a later post.

"Secure Communities" Threatens DV Victims with Deportation

Advocacy agencies are raising serious concerns about the Department of Homeland Security's "Secure Communities" program. Many agencies are going so far as to tell undocumented victims of domestic violence never to call the police, because they risk being deported themselves.

Designed to identify and deport dangerous, undocumented immigrants with a criminal history, Secure Communities has removed about 58,300 convicts from the United States since its pilot launch in late 2008, according to ICE.

But 28 percent of the people transferred to ICE custody under Secure Communities from October 2008 through June 2010 were non-criminals, according to ICE figures. Some of the detained people--an unknown number--are victims of domestic and sexual violence.

While federal law protects crime victims from having to reveal their immigration status, if these victims are arrested or have been arrested in the past Secure Communities now discloses that.

This can affect victims in a scenario where a police officer arrives at the home and can't communicate with the couple. Police may arrest both parties or even arrest the victim if the abuser speaks English and twists the series of events that led to the police call.

Victims are also subject to "revenge arrests," when abusers call the police and accuse them of perpetuating the violence.

"The man says, 'Look she scratched me, I didn't do anything.' So the woman gets arrested and if undocumented, she gets reported to ICE," Neugebaeur said. "How can I as a lawyer say now in good conscience, free and clear, 'Don't worry about anything, call the police,' because if you call the police, you can be reported to immigration services."

Several Georgia counties are already enrolled in the program, including all 5 in metro Atlanta, and the entire state will be enrolled by the end of 2012. We hate to have to say so, but if you are undocumented or are counseling a someone impacted by domestic violence who is undocumented, consider the risk of deportation before you reach out to the police. If you choose not to call 911, please get to a safe place and then contact your local domestic violence safehouse. In Atlanta: (404) 688-9436. In Georgia: (800) 33-HAVEN. Elsewhere: (800) 799-SAFE.

Georgia House Bill Addresses Human Trafficking

On a better note than our last post about the Georgia legislature, a bipartisan group is tackling human trafficking and underage prostitution in our state.

According to the AJC, "House Bill 200 is designed to help law enforcement and prosecutors go after people who traffic in people, especially minors, for sexual servitude."

The proposal increases penalties for the crime to those similar to drug trafficking, with offenders facing up to 20 years in prison for human trafficking and 50 years in prison for trafficking in minors.

The bill also treats those in sexual servitude as victims, not criminals, by offering them recovery under the state crime victims fund and an affirmative defense when coming forward.

“Human trafficking for sexual servitude is one of the most serious criminal problems facing our state,” said Lindsey, R-Atlanta. “[The bill is] designed to make it easier to go after this crime and treat the victims with compassion and give an avenue to get out of the trap that was laid for them.”

Atlanta is a nation-wide hub for human trafficking, and it is nice to see the problem being addressed on a statewide level. The focus on treating women and children who are trafficked and prostituted as victims of their traffickers is also a very welcome change. Though our organization focuses on violence against women by their intimate partners, all forms of gender-based violence are intrinsically linked, and we cannot have freedom from one while others still exists. To learn more, visit the Atlanta Human Trafficking Project.

DV and Other Things That Won't Get You Fired

According to an article on Gawker this week, the FBI considers domestic violence committed by its employees to be less worthy of a firing than fudging an expense report or shoplifting.

If employees of law enforcement agencies know that committing a violent crime against their spouse won't even get them fired, and we know that batterers who are law enforcement officers are less likely to be arrested, prosecuted, and/or found guilty of domestic violence, there is nothing in place that lets battering cops know that those actions are anything less than perfectly socially acceptable. And if their employers tell them that domestic violence isn't a big deal, even if they aren't batterers themselves, how might your average police officer or sheriff's deputy respond to a DV call?

If our nation's top law enforcement agencies don't take domestic violence seriously, how can we expect local officers to do so?

Columbus Murder-Suicide

As reported by the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer:

Investigators have tentatively determined that [Alisha] Kendrick was shot and killed by her husband, Christopher, sometime between Tuesday night and Wednesday afternoon, Columbus Police Capt. Gordon Griswould said. A local state trooper drove to the Kendricks’ house Wednesday afternoon after Alisha didn’t report to work.

An autopsy conducted Thursday revealed both victims died of gunshot wounds to the head.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the Kendrick family.

The Effects of Wrongful Arrest

The Albany Herald provided coverage this week of a Domestic Violence Awareness Month event hosted by a sister DV agency in Georgia called Liberty House. The discussion focused on an extremely important topic: the number of women whose lives are negatively impacted by calling the police because they are wrongfully arrested for using violence in self-defense.

It bothers domestic-violence survivors that victims have to fear being jailed for protecting themselves.

“My husband put a .357 Magnum to my head, and he beat me with a belt,” said Karen Lawrence, an Albany resident. “But if I hit him and gave him a scratch, he would just say go ahead and call the police. They’ll put us both in jail.”

Lawrence spoke from the audience at a Liberty House-sponsored discussion on domestic violence labeled “The Face of Domestic Violence” Thursday at Darton College.

Her experience also touched on Tuesday’s gunshot killing of Christopher Donaldson by his ex-wife Marlina Hamilton, Lawrence said.

“If the man leaves when the police were there and then he comes back, everyone I know in that situation knows that the man comes back much more mad,” Lawrence said. “Any woman will tell you that.

He is mad you called the police and he is mad you made him leave.”

Women's Resource Center offers a twice-monthly class that provides "anger management" for women who have been arrested for domestic violence. What we have observed in this class is that most of the women were arrested for using violence in self-defense. Other women were arrested for provoking a fight that they knew was coming because he had a history of using violence against her and she was tired of waiting for the other shoe to drop. Many of the women could benefit from anger management instruction, but most need domestic violence counseling and services.

The effects of these arrests cannot be understated. Many women lose their jobs, some lose their housing or public benefits, and some lose their children to their batterers or to state custody. These women also learn very quickly not to call the police ever again, meaning that they also lose the protections of the legal system. These wrongful arrests allow her to keep being victimized and are more likely to keep her in the relationship than to help her escape from it. This is an important discussion that many organizations are afraid to have and we applaud Liberty House and the Albany Herald for talking about this issue.

Expanded DV Protections for Gay Couples

The US Justice Department has directed federal prosecutors to enforce the provisions of the Violence Against Women Act with gay and lesbian couples as well.

Tracy Schmaler, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said that the office’s conclusion had been sent as guidance to federal prosecutors around the country.

Ms. Schmaler said she could not answer questions about the context of the request because it was a matter of internal deliberations.

But Brian Moulton, the chief legislative counsel of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay and lesbian advocacy group, said his group asked the Obama transition team after the 2008 election to have the office “clarify” for prosecutors that the Violence Against Women Act covers violence that might arise in same-sex relationships.

“It’s a step towards equality and recognizing that our relationships exist and are subject to the same sorts of issues that face other committed couples,” Mr. Moulton said. “Unfortunately, sometimes that is domestic violence and other issues that need to be dealt with through the criminal justice system.”

Congress first passed the Violence Against Women Act in 1994. Among other things, its provisions made it a federal crime to cross state lines with the intent of committing domestic violence, stalking, or violating a protection order. Lawmakers have since expanded the act several times.

The federal government’s treatment of gay and lesbian relationships has been a matter of sharp dispute against the backdrop of efforts to legalize same-sex marriage.

A 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, requires the federal government to define legal terms like “marriage” and “spouse” as categories that can exist only with a union between one man and one woman.

But Mr. Barron argued in the memorandum that although the Violence Against Women Act defines possible victims as including the “spouse” of the abuser, the act also includes terms not covered by the Defense of Marriage Act, like “dating partner” and “intimate partner.”

Moreover, he noted, the text of the act uses gender-neutral language, like saying “another person” instead of “a woman.” He cited such language as proof that Congress intended the protections to cover same-sex couples as well as heterosexual ones.

Domestic violence in same-gender relationships is a serious issue that occurs at approximately the same rates as violence in opposite-gender relationships. Additional barriers exist for GLBT individuals, however, because they may fear homophobia from law enforcement, advocates, or even other residents of the shelter if they try to seek help. Regardless of your gender identity or sexual orientation, no one deserves to be abused. GLBTQQI survivors in the Atlanta area can call the United 4 Safety helpline at 404-200-5957 or our 24-hotline at 404-688-9436. We will help you create a plan that takes into account your unique needs and barriers and helps you create a new life of safety for yourself.

Yeardley Love and Dating Violence

Recognize the name George Huguely? He is the former boyfriend charged with killing UVA lacrosse player Yeardley Love. We wouldn't be surprised if you recognize her name but not his. Reporting on domestic violence often concentrates on the victim, why she stayed, what she could have done to stay safe, and often erases the culpability of the perpetrator entirely. Even Newsweek, who ran a story on the case this week, felt the need to title their story "Turns Out, Yeardley Love Couldn't Have Gotten a Restraining Order If She Wanted To".

Despite that, the article has good information about dating violence. Dating violence is the common term for domestic violence (or family violence, or intimate partner violence) that is used when the couple is not married, has not lived together, or do not have children together. The title of the article draws attention to a major difference in the way that the law addresses domestic violence vs. dating violence. In many states, victims of dating violence cannot apply for a restraining order.

The tragedy has also brought new light to dating violence on college campuses, where as many as one in four female students experience sexual assault. But perhaps the most disturbing new revelation is the fact that, despite Huguely's violent past, Love couldn't have filed for a restraining order against him even if she wanted to. Virginia is one of eight states that excludes people in dating relationships—in other words, unmarried couples or partners—from getting protective restraining orders, and for the past three years, the state has failed an annual assessment of domestic-violence-protection laws. Presented by Break the Cycle, a national nonprofit that works to end domestic violence, the State Law Report Card assesses how easy, or difficult, it is for teens seeking legal protection from abuse.

In Georgia, Love could have applied for what our state calls at Stalking Protective Order. She would have been required to document repeated acts that caused her to fear for her own safety or the safety of a member of her immediate family, and that caused her emotional distress. It would have been up to the judge to determine if these things qualify:

[Huguely] had been Tasered by a female police officer in 2008, after threatening her in a drunken rage. He had to be separated from Love at a party, and allegedly attacked a sleeping teammate, leaving his face bruised, after hearing that the player had kissed Love. He'd been charged with underage alcohol possession, reckless driving, and in 2008, police were summoned by the 22-year-old's father after the two got into a heated argument aboard a fishing boat and Huguely tried to swim the quarter mile to shore.

It is pretty clear to everyone reading that summary that Huguely was a guy who had trouble with violence and anger. He had been arrested and he had had friends physically separate him from Love at a party, illustrating for him that his behavior had gone to far. However, he was never kicked out of school, or even off the lacrosse team, for his violent behavior. The University has been hammered over that very issue, but claim that they had no way of knowing of Huguely's violent past because police aren't required to notify universities of the arrest of their students. Until we get to a place where we are taking violence against women seriously, until we are notifying those who can hold perpetrators accountable when it happens, until we are holding violent abusers accountable in meaningful ways, tragedies like this will continue to happen. That's not happening now. What is happening now is that people are completely missing the point:

All we know about Love’s death is that she was likely killed by someone close to her. So why are UVA police responding to the murder by warning students against crimes committed by strangers?

The e-mail, from University of Virginia Police Chief Mike Gibson:

While Charlottesville remains a relatively safe environment, crimes do occur in our community. The best defense is to be prepared and to take responsibility for your own safety and for that of your friends and fellow students. A few key reminders:

Trust your instincts about a person or situation. If you feel uncomfortable, immediately report your concerns to police by calling 911.

If you are on the Grounds and need help, pick up one of the blue-light telephones. You will be immediately connected to University Police. Be aware of your surroundings. Do not let a cell phone conversation or listening
to music distract you when crossing the street or in any type of situation that calls for your full attention.

Avoid isolated areas and walking alone at night. Use SafeRide (434-242-1122), walk with friends, or take a late-night weekend bus.

Keep your doors and windows locked.

Never allow strangers to follow you into a locked building and gain entry by “tailgating” you once you swipe the card reader in a residence hall. Also, never prop open card-reader doors.

If you see any of the following, immediately call the police at 911: a prowler, someone peeping into a residence, an individual watching, photographing or filming an area, or any other suspicious behavior.

Work with your neighbors and fellow community members to ensure a safe
environment.

UVA police have instructed students how to avoid and/or respond to the following: An attack on the grounds of the university. Getting hit by a car. A late-night street attack. An attack by an unknown intruder. An attack through the window. An attack by a prowler. An attack by a peeping Tom. An attack by a suspicious filmmaker.

Police believe that Love was killed by a more likely suspect—a man she knew. In general, women, and particularly young women, are more likely to be killed by someone they know than by a stranger. So why hasn’t UVA included any information here about domestic violence?

UVA student Madeleine Conger, forwarded Gibson’s e-mail. “I find it appalling . . . that no mention is made of how to tell if you are in an abusive relationship, how to avoid escalating aggressive confrontation, resources for people in abusive situations, or tips for friends of those who are,” says Conger. “Not even the number of the amazing women’s center we have here.”

She adds: “I just don’t understand why we can’t speak honestly about violence. . . . Locking your doors isn’t going to keep your boyfriend from hitting you.”

Commerce Man Kills Sons, Self

Two days ago, a Georgia man killed his young son and stepson before taking his own life.

Relatives of 36-year-old Keith Jermaine Gresham found the Commerce man dead Monday afternoon inside a car parked on a remote dirt road between Commerce and Jefferson, according to Chief Deputy David Cochran of the Jackson County Sheriff's Office.

The two boys, Keionte Gresham, 4, and Keion Gresham, 7, were found shot to death outside the vehicle.

Keith Gresham was Keion's natural father, according to Cochran.

Cochran told the AJC on Tuesday that Keith Gresham had been involved in an ongoing domestic dispute with the children's mother, who had custody of the boys.

She let the boys spend the weekend with Gresham, but he failed to return them.

On Monday morning, relatives got phone calls and text messages from Gresham, who threatened to harm himself, Cochran said. They went looking for Gresham and the boys, and found them dead on Old Woods Bridge Road.

OnlineAthens has more details:

Prosecutors were attempting to revoke his probation because he had been charged with aggravated stalking in Oglethorpe County and misdemeanor marijuana possession in Jackson County.

Gresham and the boys' mother, Catrina Doster, had been separated for at least a year.

A Jackson County judge granted Doster a 12-month restraining order against Gresham in 2008 and a second 12-month restraining order in October 2009 requiring him to stay 500 yards away from her and her children, according to documents filed in the Jackson County court clerk's office.

However, she allowed Gresham to visit with the children this weekend in advance of his probation revocation hearing, Cochran said.

But when he didn't return the children, Doster, who lives outside of Jackson County, filed an interference with custody complaint with the Commerce Police Department on Monday morning.

Some women want their children to continue a relationship with their father even after they have separated, while others fear harm or an expensive custody battle if the try to keep the kids away. Unfortunately, this case is indicative of a horrifying trend:

In the nine months between June 2009 and April 2010, 75 children have been killed by fathers involved in volatile custody battles with their former partners, according to the Center for Judicial Excellence, a court advocacy organization which has been tracking news articles of such deaths around the U.S. Based in San Rafael, California, the Center focuses on strengthening court integrity as well as improving public accountability of the judiciary.

Some recent examples from the dockets of Family Courts around the country:

» Teigan Peters Brown (3 years old), shot to death by his father during a court-ordered visit. (Arizona June 2009)
» Bekm Bacon (8 months), killed by father, who then killed himself during overnight visitation. (Idaho Feb 2010)
» Janiyah Nicole Hale (1 year), father is charged with her death during an overnight visitation. He is a registered sex offender. (Alabama July 2009)

Office judges do not give women a choice, and many don't take a history of domestic violence into consideration when awarding visitation or custody to violent man.

Experts say abusers use the court system to exercise control over their former partner’s lives, manipulating the players and risking the safety and well being of the children’s lives the courts are sworn to protect.

“Family courts are trained to look for cooperative behavior,” says Rob (Roberta) Valente, general counsel for the National Network to End Domestic Violence, which is based in Washington D.C. “When someone raises an abuse allegation, the court sees it as uncooperative behavior. The result, advocates say, is that the abuser is able to manipulate the court, while a child’s safety and well-being is placed at risk. Many judges are likely to view abuse complaints as a tactic to win custody battles. What the courts have failed to take into account but research has clearly shown time and time again, is that most of the cases that make it to trial in family court are high-risk abuse cases.

Compounding the problem is that judges, attorneys and custody evaluators have little or no training in detecting signs of abuse.

Just 20 per cent of the almost one million divorces and separations registered every year in the U.S. actually land in court. Most are settled in the pre-trial phase, according to Prof. Janet Johnston of San Jose State University, in research studies written for the journal, The Family Court Review.

But of the few who make it to a judge, over 75 percent of these cases are victims of some form of domestic or sexual abuse, according to a 1995 paper by Prof. Peter Jaffe of the University of Western Ontario, who studies children and violence in U.S. and Canadian court systems.

Today’s family courts have also been affected by the rise of the Fathers Rights movement. During the 1950s, family courts almost exclusively awarded custody to mothers. But complaints by fathers that their rights were ignored in custody battles led to a shift in the 1970s to awarding shared custody, on the grounds that it was in the best interest of the child to maintain a relationship with both parents.

Nevertheless, only a small percentage of high-conflict cases require judges to act as conciliators between parties locked in otherwise endless litigation. The majority involve mothers and children that are suffering from serious sexual or domestic abuse.

The National Father Resource Center disputes this, claiming that its member organizations report that 80 percent of mothers’ abuse allegations are false. Although Canadian research from the University of Toronto studying false allegations in U.S. and Canadian custody cases has found that between one and two percent of mothers make false allegations, the fathers’ rights argument has had a powerful impact. As shown by the Tagle case, courts don’t want to hear the mothers’ allegations.

“Historically, allegations of abuse and incest are [met] with a great deal of suspicion, and there is a tremendous resistance to hearing these types of allegations,” said Eileen King, director of Justice for Children, a national non-profit that works to protect children involved in contested custody cases.

Even OnlineAthens felt the need to sneak this comment into their article:

Watson described her cousin as a devoted father who saw his children as often as he could.

"Keith has always been a good dad," she said. "Nobody could separate him from his children. Even when he and Catrina split up, he still went to see his kids."

You know what makes a man a good dad? Not beating up mom! Even after the couple separate, the father's attitudes toward women and violence continue to shape the children's worldview. Unless he is willing to attend counseling or an intervention program to address his abusive past, judges should seriously consider whether allowing the father to parent is really in the children's best interests.

For more information, read the whole article from The Crime Report.

How to Prosecute a DV Case

A man in Athens was given a 22-year sentence for a 2006 assault on his then-wife. This is remarkable because the DA's office chose to pursue the case, and was able to do so successfully, without the victim's involvement.

Robert Lynn Jones, 45, was convicted after a weeklong trial that ended Friday, with jurors taking three hours to find him guilty of family violence aggravated battery, second-degree criminal damage and a slew of motor vehicle violations for leading police on a multicounty chase.

Judge Steve Jones ordered the defendant to serve the first 16 years of the sentence in prison and the balance on probation.

Robert Jones' conviction was significant, because the district attorney's office went forward with prosecution despite a reluctant victim, according to Assistant District Attorney Leslie Spornberger Jones.

"It's an important case for us because domestic violence is something we are pro-prosecution about," Leslie Jones said. "This was a case where (the victim) said she didn't want to be involved, and we said it's basically with the state now."

That allowed the victim to tell her abuser that the district attorney's office was pursuing charges, not her, so he couldn't retaliate, according to Leslie Jones.

Robert Jones is a classic abuser who controlled every aspect of his wife's life to make it difficult for her to break free, Leslie Jones said.

"He told her how to do her hair and what to wear," she said.

The couple moved frequently, from Alabama where they were married in 2002, to the Carolinas, and Clarke and Madison counties, so that local authorities couldn't investigate reports of abuse.

"Every time he did something to her, he would leave, they would get back together, and they'd move somewhere else," Jones said.

The tipping point came Sept. 4, 2006, when the couple argued in the yard of their Hull Road home. The fight moved indoors, where Robert Jones pummeled his wife's face with his fist.

During the trial, one of the responding officers testified it was one of the worst beatings he'd seen, according to Leslie Jones.

Robert Jones fled his home, but he returned later that day and led officers on a chase through Madison and Jackson counties, then back to Athens where he wrecked his car and ran, police said.

Officers found him two days later, holed up in a motel in Monroe where he threatened drink antifreeze and kill himself.

"That was a key issue in the trial because it described the whole cycle of violence," Leslie Jones said. "He would always get (the victim) back by apologizing, and when that didn't work, he'd threaten suicide."

The victim divorced Robert Jones after the 2006 assault, and has since remarried and lives in another state, she said.

Prosecutors often rely on victim testimony in domestic violence battery cases and many will dismiss if a victim refuses to participate. However, women who have experienced domestic violence have many good reasons to fear cooperating with prosecutors, including fear of her partner's retaliation or not wanting him to go to jail because she relies on his income. This case and others like it prove that it is possible for the state to successfully pursue charges without victim involvement. After all, these cases are Georgia v. Johnson and not A. Johnson v. B. Johnson. It is the state's responsibility to keep its citizen's safe and to hold those who commit crimes accountable for their actions.

How Many Bad Decisions Can You Spot?

Background: Baltimore police received a domestic violence call from a woman who said she was assaulted by her boyfriend. They went to the home, took the woman's statement, noticed visible injuries on her body, and made the arrest.

Fast forward to the assault trial:

Last Wednesday, Wood appeared in district court in Essex for trial on charges of assault, but when the case was called, his lawyer proposed a whole different idea.

"He's asking for a postponement so he can go out and get married, come back and resolve the case. His wife will then invoke her privilege," the defense attorney said.

The lawyer was referring to the marital privilege that prevents a spouse from being required to testify against his or her husband or wife, Miller reported.

Wood and his fiancee weren't married, but the judge stepped in to fix that.

"Well, why don't I just marry them today in court?" Russell said.

"Well, your honor, if we could go and get the license now, I think that would be acceptable to all the parties," the defense attorney responded.

The judge advised that Wood and his fiancee would have to go to Towson to the circuit court where marriage licenses are issued, but he assured the defendant that he'd be available that same day to officiate the wedding.

"I'll marry them this afternoon," Russell said.

The marriage license was issued at 11:26 a.m. Two hours later, Wood and his fiancee were back at court in Essex and were married by Russell in his office, Miller reported.

The criminal case resumed 20 minutes later.

"Your honor, Mr. Wood now has his marriage license with him," the defense attorney said.

"I can take notice of that because I just married them -- performed the ceremony -- back in my chambers," Russell responded.

Wood's new wife then took the witness stand and invoked her marital privilege, Miller reported.

The case came to an abrupt end, with the judge making a parting comment.

"Mr. Wood, I found you not guilty, so I can't sentence you as a defendant in any crimes, but earlier today, I sentenced you to life married to her," Russell said.

Nowhere on the recording of the proceeding could the I-Team hear the judge ask the alleged victim if she wanted to get married.

Ordinarily, couples have to wait 48 hours between getting a license and actually getting married. A different judge agreed to waive that requirement in this case, Miller reported.

So what we have here is a judge who decides to actively participate in the defense of a batterer and ensure that the victim has additional barriers in place (the time and cost associated with a divorce, plus possible cultural and religious values that look down on divorce) to keep her from being able to leave. How emboldened must this batterer feel to know that he was coming to be held accountable for his actions and, instead, the legal system helped him trap his victim even more soundly?

Now can you spot the good decision?

A Baltimore County judge has been reassigned following a story by the 11 News I-Team about his handling of a domestic violence case last week.

Judge Darrell Russell has been reassigned to chambers work, I-Team lead investigative reporter Jayne Miller said. He will not be hearing any cases for an indefinite period of time.

Too bad the damage to this woman's life has already been done.

Follow-Up: Covington Man Kills Ex

As a follow-up to this story, the Rockdale Citizen reports that Atkinson had an active Temporary Protective Order against Barrow that he had recently violated. Warning, the quotes below may be triggering to survivors of violence.

Reports have come to light that show the 19-year-old victim who was shot dead at a convenience store Sunday night by her estranged boyfriend had done all the law allows in an effort to protect herself after he forced their infant son to kiss the bullet he vowed he would use to kill her.

Audrey Savon Atkinson had filed a temporary protective order, or TPO, against Anthony Michael Barrow, 22, when he had threatened to shoot and kill her on Feb. 27.

In Georgia, a TPO is a court order to help protect a victim from someone who is abusing, threatening or harassing them. The order requires the abuser to stay away from the victim, their home and their place of employment or from contacting the person in any way. Getting a TPO does not mean the abuser goes to jail, but makes it easier for the police to arrest the abuser for coming near the victim later.

According to the Newton County Sheriff’s Office, the order was served on Barrow at 7:30 p.m. March 3, four days before he made good on his threat.

Atkinson had also filed a report with the Conyers Police Department earlier in the day on March 3, advising them Barrow had threatened her once again over the phone and that she had word from a friend that he had been “calling around asking all his friends to give him a ride to (the Conyers) Chili’s,” where Atkinson was employed.

According to the incident report, Atkinson told Conyers officers that Barrow had called her cell phone while she was on her way to take the couple’s 8-month-old son to a babysitter and they had gotten into an argument.

“Atkinson said during the course of the argument, (Barrow) made several threatening statements such as ‘your days are numbered’ and ‘we will meet again very soon.’” the report stated. “Atkinson said at this point she informed him she had taken a temporary protection order out against him. She said (Barrow) replied saying ‘you don’t keep me from anything.’ When Atkinson asked what he meant by that statement, he responded saying ‘don’t worry about it, just know I will see you again very soon.’”

About 8:30 p.m., which according to NCSO records would have been an hour after Barrow was served with the TPO, Atkinson told officers she received a text from Barrow, asking if she’d be at work “tomorrow.”

Atkinson told the CPD officer that on Feb. 27 she and Barrow had gotten into an argument which ended with her telling him she was moving out of the home at 55 Wellington Trail in Covington where they had lived with Barrow’s grandparents.

“Atkinson said while packing some of her belongings (Barrow) pushed her to the ground and then kicked her ... and (he) made several threats telling her he was going to kill her and made their son kiss one of the bullets to his handgun. Atkinson said (Barrow) told her he was going to kill her with the bullet (their son) had kissed,” the incident report states.

Monday morning, after shooting and killing Atkinson about 10 p.m. Sunday at Liberty Food Mart at 2080 Crowell Road, Barrow took his own life after a four-hour standoff with Covington/Newton County S.W.A.T. at his home in the Wellington Ridge subdivision.

We've had the discussion before about the importance of prevention and it bears repeating. Atkinson did everything she was "supposed" to do. She left, she called the police, she took out a Protective Order and Barrow still took her life. We place the burden on the victim to protect herself. If we didn't, the police would have arrested him for making terroristic threats and held him in jail or would have taken his gun since those with Protective Orders against them in Georgia are not allowed to have firearms. Either of those things could have provided Atkinson with additional protection and they would have shown Barrow that he would be held accountable for his actions. Instead, we raise our boys believing that violence against women is justified and women who do all of the right things are still stolen from their children and families.

Perpetrator Killed, Two Wounded at DV Call

Via the AJC:

One man was killed and two other people wounded -- including a DeKalb County police officer -- in a domestic dispute at a Stone Mountain apartment complex.

The apparent shooter was shot and killed by police at the Stone Mountain Colony apartment complex, police spokesman Officer Jason Gagnon said.

Police responded around 7:15 p.m. to a domestic incident in the apartment complex just east of North Hairston Road near Stone Mountain Village.

When police arrived, "The gunman came out of the apartment firing several rounds at our officers," Gagnon said. "Officers shot back at the suspect, and he was killed at the scene."

SWAT was called immediately -- officers were already in the area patrolling for a serial rapist and were able to respond quickly to the call, Gagnon said.

A female victim, shot by the suspect before police arrived, was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, where she was listed in critical condition, police said.

The police officer was shot in the leg and was taken to Grady, where he was listed in stable but serious condition, Gagnon said.

DV calls are some of the most dangerous to which law enforcement officers respond. That should give you some indication of what women who experience abuse are dealing with. Law enforcement officers have weapons and have been trained in self defense. If they fear coming into contact with batterers, is it any surprise that victims are afraid to make choices that may escalate the violence? Keep this in mind the next time you are tempted to question a woman experiencing domestic violence when she makes choices that you don't agree with or understand. You never know what you might do when faced with that kind of fear.

I'm Moving to Athens

Because Athens takes domestic violence seriously.

Depression, jealousy, substance abuse, unemployment and even pregnancy can be warning signs that a troubled relationship is headed toward murder.

Domestic violence experts call these clues "lethality factors," and after a particularly deadly 2009, Athens-Clarke police plan to revamp their reporting system to document those risk factors in the future.

"We're working on putting lethality factors in reports so when they get to the investigators, they can determine where they need to go with them," said Lt. David Leedahl of the Athens-Clarke Police Department's Centralized Criminal Investigations division.

"The higher the lethality factors are, the higher the risk is" that a victim might be seriously harmed or killed, Leedahl said.

Police will track lethality factors to help prioritize cases, and prosecutors will look at those circumstances to fast-track the most dangerous abusers through court, and judges will consider them when deciding whether to set bail, Athens-Clarke Solicitor General C.R. Chisholm said.

"On the standard report, officers don't have a list of lethality factors, so this is going to make it easier for them to check things off," Chisholm said.

Looking for and documenting lethality factors is just one way authorities are trying to prevent another year like 2009, when a record 10 people were killed in Clarke County because of domestic violence.

Two weeks ago, police tripled the number of investigators assigned to work domestic violence cases, from two to six.

That means the average monthly caseload for a domestic violence investigator should drop from 45 cases to about 20, according to Leedahl.

"That's a more manageable number," he said. "It will allow investigators to get more in-depth in their cases and lead to more prosecutions."

The Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council funded the new investigator positions, under the Violence Against Women Act, partly because the grant application cited the huge spike in domestic violence murders, according to Leedahl.

"We certainly don't want to see a repeat of last year," he said.

Chisholm's office also received a CJCC grant that will soon let him hire a prosecutor dedicated to handling domestic violence cases in State Court, just as the district attorney has for Superior Court cases.

"We want someone who will be handling cases from the arraignment on," Chisholm said. "We want prosecutors meeting not just with victims and witnesses, but going to the (crime) scene and being more active with their communications between victims, detectives and domestic violence services so that we can reduce, if not eliminate, the possibility of information slipping through the cracks."

Hiring more detectives and prosecutors will help better protect domestic violence victims, but just adding lethality factors to police reports could have a dramatic impact, said Joan Prittie, executive director of Project Safe, a nonprofit that helps victims of domestic violence,

"Lethality factors are useful because they focus on aspects of domestic violence that are really significant in the potential for danger," Prittie said.

When she trains police officers and others about domestic violence, Prittie uses an example to show how lethality factors can predict violence:

An Athens woman broke up with her abusive boyfriend, but he found out where she moved and pestered her with notes, flowers and promises to treat her better. One night he banged on the woman's door and refused to leave, threatening to get a relative's gun and kill himself.

The woman called the police, who charged the man with criminal trespass, because he hadn't threatened or hurt the woman or committed any other crimes.

"If you looked at what happened in the traditional way, it doesn't seem that frightening," Prittie said.

"If someone who knew about lethality factors had talked to (the victim), they would have learned she was pregnant, he had a substance abuse problem, the abuse escalated prior to her leaving, and he was unemployed," she said.

Abusers like to feel they are in control, but they might feel it slipping away when they don't have a job or the victim gets pregnant and changes her priorities to focus on her child, Prittie explained.

"Sure enough, in this case, the guy came back and shot her, but amazingly she survived," she said. "If the police had been using lethality factors, then this case of criminal trespass rises to the stack of all they have to investigate. And the magistrate, instead of just saying this is just a criminal trespass case says, 'OK, we need to set a high bond or get a no-contact order,' and the prosecutor can put this offender on the fast-track."

These are the 14 most general recognized lethality factors, indications that an abusive relationship might end with serious violence or death:

The abuser:

• Choked the victim
• Sexually assaulted the victim
• Has gotten more violent
• Made death threats
• Has access to firearms
• Abuses drugs or alcohol
• Lives with the victim or knows where to find him/her
• Tries to control the victim and has jealous tendencies
• Suffers from depression or has suicidal thoughts
• Harasses the victim through stalking and other means
• Doesn't have a job

The victim:

• Left the abuser or is trying to
• Has a strong feeling of terror
• Is pregnant