Victim of Domestic Violence Doesn't Want to Testify Against Husband

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Washington

I was physically assaulted by my husband after a heated argument and was injured. I called the police and they took pictures of me and a statement - I don't want to pursue the charges against him and want the case dropped. I also don't want to testify against him though I am sure I will be subpoenaed. What are the consequences of me not showing for the trial or refusing to testify. Can the prosecutor force me to testify ?Can I invoke spousal privilage. If so how do I do it. DO I need a lawyer?

You have no say as to whether charges are pursued or not.

No, you cannot invoke spousal privilege. Yes, you can be compelled to testify. If you avoid the subpoena or refuse to testify you can go to jail.

Also, if you refuse to cooperate, if you and your husband have any children you can expect child services to get involved anbd potentially seize the children or impose conditions for the two of you to attend counseling or anger management.

Ignoring this is not going to make it all better. Typically, these situations get worse, not better.

By not allowing for the situation to resolve, you are setting yourself up for potentially more danger. There's a thing called the cycle of violence. Right about now, you guys are probably feeling really remorseful about the whole thing. A lot of apologizing and taking some responsibilty too. Things will go well for a while, but slowly the issues will come up again. The violence happened for a reason. Things spiraled out of control. Your husband needs to find counseling for that reason. Going on your own is not a good idea because you can stop once you feel "cured." When the court gets involved, you must complete the program in it's entirety. It's not a guarantee that he will never be violent again but, it helps him learn how to make better choices.

Quote:

---

Quoting keys

---

I was physically assaulted by my husband after a heated argument and was injured. I called the police and they took pictures of me and a statement - I don't want to pursue the charges against him and want the case dropped.

---

If you don't want a law enforcement response, then why contact law enforcement? Once you report a crime, the criminal justice system has a duty to society to investigate the report and act accordingly.

You aren't the only victim. Crimes, including domestic violence, are considered to be committed against ALL members of society. The state's job is to protect everyone, even those, who don't WANT to be protected, by pursuing such cases - especially when they have such strong evidence in the form of photos of injuries inflicted. In other words, at the end of the day, you don't get to say that it's ok for someone to commit a crime. If there are children in the home, you really need to heed the advice of the previous posters - because while the state may not be happy that you're willing to return to an environment that has resulted in violence against you, the state, in the form of the child protection arm, can absolutely remove any children who are exposed to it (Google the term "failure to protect").

Quote:

---

DO I need a lawyer?

---

Unles YOU get charged with a crime, you wouldn't need a criminal defense attorney.

I am in a similar position. My boyfriend and I drank too much got into a fight and while he was trying to take my keys so I wouldnt drive I fell and broke my shoulder. I didnt file charges but nurse in the emergency room called the police and they arrested him. I am now subpeoned to be a witness in his trial. I dont want to do this, I called the asst. D.A. and told her so. She argued, asked me a lot of questions etc. Can I be a witness for the defense as well? Is there any way I can get out of this. I feel like its very wrong for him to have legal repurcussions/jail time/fines etc..

Hi Nostivaz. If you start your own thread, rather than posting your question at the end of Keys post, you are more likely to get the experts to see it and respond.

Quote:

---

Quoting nostivaz

---

while he was trying to take my keys so I wouldnt drive I fell and broke my shoulder.

---

The CORRECT thing for him to do would have been to allow you to leave, then call police and notify them that you were potentially impaired. Instead, he acted protectively by attempting to stop you from leaving. The problem is that he doesn't get to do that. As an adult, even an intoxicated one, you enjoy the freedom to come and go as you please, even if it means getting behind the wheel and killing yourself or someone else. By physically confronting you and trying to take the keys, even with good intentions, he broke the law - just as robbing a bank is a crime regardless of whether the robber is intending to blow the money on drugs, or donate it to charity. When the breaking of the law coincides with the infliction of injury, even if the injury wasn't intended, the criminal court gets to consider that as part of the crime.

Yes, if either side calls you as a witness, then BOTH sides will get to ask you questions.

It's unfortunate that a moment of intoxication led to these events, but choices and actions have consequences. You put him in a situation to either allow you to leave and risk your life, or to stop you by any means necessary, including committing a battery. He did like many people would, and while he apparantly succeeded since you're alive and posting here, he did so at risk of peril to himself. It sucks for him because he's facing some pretty big consequences, but this scenario of people drinking and someone else physically trying to stop them happens every day, and the outcome is entirely predictable. It's one of the big dangers of being involved with people who drink - because they have the potential to PUT people they're around in these situations, and force them to make a decision - to either save the drinker, or risk criminal charges themselves. While in the big picture it may feel that it's wrong for him to be facing the consequences of your actions, the state doesn't have a case against YOU, because he prevented you from driving and facing that risk. But his METHOD of doing so is the issue for the state. (A little squirt of superglue in the ignition would have accomplished the same thing, and would have resulted in a much lower criminal charge, had you reported it.) But he simply isn't allowed to physically engage you and prevent you from leaving. And, since there were injuries resulting from that engagement, the state has a pretty good case against him.

You can absolutely make the choice to not appear in court as ordered, but you need to be aware that such a decision carries consequences too, which can include a warrant being issued for YOUR arrest.

Quote:

---

Quoting aardvarc

---

The CORRECT thing for him to do would have been to allow you to leave, then call police and notify them that you were potentially impaired.

---

I have to disagree with this statement.

It is never the right course of action to let an obviously drunk person get behind the wheel in the hopes that the police catch them before they kill people. Moral and ethical issues aside, the person that gave the person the keys may be held liable for the damages as well.

This is like saying that you should just allow someone to shoot a weapon haphazardly until it kills someone.

The correct thing to do would be to call the police before the person got in the car and state that a drunk person was intoxicated in public and trying to get behind the wheel of an automobile.

Actually, Aardvarc is right. Common sense and the law don't always match up. As an adult, she is in full right to break tthe law by driving drunk. If one tries to stop her and is successful, nobody knows about the interaction. But this interaction led to a fight and as a result, the person attempting to be a good samaritan became the perpetrator by taking a police matter in his hands.

Frankly, I would not have left an obviously impaired person to drive. Period.

I'd rather be explaining myself in a battery beef then trying to tell myself I am not responsible for someone's death should he run into a pedestrian or other vehicle. No brainer for me. I suppose it's the pitfalls of seeing the results of DUI deaths.