My Husband Was Charged With Domestic Violence

[BriLu]

Because of all of this "help" I haven't had more than three hours of sleep each night for the past week. I feel even more sick than I did before all of this occurred. I am stuck in the house all day because I can't contact my husband to get the car and if he contacts me he will go to jail. My husband might lose his job. I might lose my job from being late and not having a ride on time. (They've already been bitching). My husband probably thinks I lied on him or something because of the souped up EPO statement police wrote. And the advocate I was assigned I promise you has special needs and I honestly feel that I wasn't explained my rights correctly if I can say at all. This is just some BULL. And I know that there is really some poor victim getting abused out there and some evil villain doing the abusing that really need this help but my husband and I are not those people at all!

[Jared_A]

I'm trying to clarify - you can dump the 'tude, dude.

You seemed to be implying that unless serious injuries are involved, a felony should be out of the question.

Is that correct?

What I think, in general, is that the punishment should match the severity of the crime, and the intent of the individual. For instance even if you fail, if you intend to kill someone, attempted murder is a serious crime. If you are angry and push someone with no intent to cause them serious harm, but they trip and hit their head and die, you have little or not intent to cause harm, but you still have to take responsibility for the person's death. Well what happens if there was(as far as any of us can tell) no intent to cause serious harm, and no serious harm was caused. Is that really a situation where the government needs to fast rope in from helicopters and take over the situation? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I tent to favor "isn't."

[Dogmatique]

Thank you for the clarification of what you meant.

[BriLu]

If you guys could please stop being weird and take a look at my new post I would really appreciate it. I did not mean for anyone to argue/ debate over my problems but I really do need help with this! Thanks guys!

[cdwjava]

No there have NOT been "previous incidents" yes we do argue a great deal but that's not against the law

No, arguing is not against the law. But, I suspect that an outsider looking in would have been able to see that there was a problem. Since the two of you chose not to act on what was likely apparent - had you chosen to see it - you now have to deal with the legal ramifications.

Unfortunately that didn't happen this time but like Jared I don't understand how pushing me on the bed is a felony.

The push wasn't the felony - the visible injury was.

I get pushed on the bed when were about to have sex and so do millions of people for that matter.

That's not unwanted. Though, I suppose you can try to convince a DA or a jury that your actions and injury were a prelude to a sexual act which never occurred ...

I know that this happened to protect me but I feel like my life is being ruined all because of a stupid selfish stress-caused mistake.

Starting with him. Don't compound it by denying that there is a problem. If you do, and you allow this to continue, then it will only get worse. These things almost inevitably spiral downward.

- - - Updated - - -

If he has to stay in jail until the first hearing he will lose whatever government job she is talking about with little chance of ever getting it back.

That depends on the job ... and whether or not he can get bail or O/R.

So even if they get counseling and work on their marriage, they're both going to suffer from the lost income.

The time to consider the consequences of an act is BEFORE committing it. The government did not create this situation - the defendant did. Or, if you want to share the blame, they both did. And, because their actions ventured outside the private realm, the government was forced to step in.

I think I'm becoming a libertarian, I generally think people need to take more personal responsibility.

It's a pity we live in a culture where everything is everyone else's fault. Take this thread, for example ...

[BriLu]

Ok so I just called the DA office and spoke to an advocate and she said the charges were already filed but reduced to misdemeanor instead of felony. I wonder why when I called last week I was told the case was not there yet? I called Friday and the office just opened today which is Monday. Strange. I told her all of the things surrounding the case and she also felt that it wasn't handled properly but unfortunately since I was told Friday that they hadn't received the case and the DA already moved forward, she said she was only able to make notes and told me to just make sure I make a statement in court.

[cdwjava]

Ok so I just called the DA office and spoke to an advocate and she said the charges were already filed but reduced to misdemeanor instead of felony. I wonder why when I called last week I was told the case was not there yet?

Because cases don't magically materialize on the DA's desk. They have to be written and approved before being sent to the DA's office. Since he was in custody and there was the potential for arraignment within 48 hours (two business days) the agency likely had it to the DA's office within two days (four if over the weekend). If your husband was released on his own recognizance or made bail, then there would have been no rush to process the papers as arraignment would have been put off.

If the charges have been reduced to misdemeanors it is likely that they intend to offer him a plea deal - likely probation, anger management counseling, and maybe a CPO that requires him to "play nice" (i.e. no more violence).

I told her all of the things surrounding the case and she also felt that it wasn't handled properly

Clearly the advocate does not know police procedure or the law. She is free to her opinion, but it's likely wrong.

old me to just make sure I make a statement in court.

Did she also tell you that if you intend to make statements that contradict the police report you should speak with your own criminal defense attorney? Remember, the advocate is NOT an attorney. Advising you to make statements that could land you in legal jeopardy is not a good idea and I don't know any advocate that would do so ... I suppose you did not tell her that you intended to contradict the police report?

[BriLu]

Ok but I also know he should not plea anything because that would be a conviction right? And sir I called them Friday twice once in the morning and again in the afternoon and then this morning as soon as they opened. That's why I said it was strange. And yes I told her that I felt the officer exaggerated the report too. This is so frustrating I feel like I personally just need an attorney just to keep me informed of the case and my own rights because apparently all I've been receiving is false information from people I thought were supposed to help me. And I was also told by an attorney that I DO still have time to convince the DA to drop and that they can drop at anytime before and during the case. She told me I should just write a statement and give it to the DA saying (something like) I do not wish for my husband to be prosecuted and that I'm not in any danger. But I am not sure what that will do and she is not even from this state but she said no matter what state I'm in I do not have to testify against my husband which I already knew but I also know and tried to tell her that since so many Real Endangered victims say that ( because they may be scared or intimidated) that it may not really help but she was adamant about doing that and that only. What do you think? Because yes I know my husband and I have issues because we have arguments and we did push each other but I honestly don't feel like someone deserves to be sent to jail or convicted of DV because they pushed their wife on the bed. And I'm positive that parents don't raise their kids I fear saying omg do not push each other because one day you might go to jail and lose your job. No your parents tell you don't hit girls. And don't push your brother cause its not nice. But I can guaranDAMNtee you after all this BS I won't even push a damn elevator button and its not taking me going to jail to decide that!

[cdwjava]

Ok but I also know he should not plea anything because that would be a conviction right?

That is between him and his attorney. A plea deal to probation and counseling might be better than a conviction at trial that leads to jail time, probation, and counseling. And the plea might result in diversion if such a thing is available where you are (a diversion would be no permanent record).

And I was also told by an attorney that I DO still have time to convince the DA to drop and that they can drop at anytime before and during the case.

Of course the DA CAN drop a case ... they just may have little inclination to do so. And some DAs offices have aggressive prosecution policies for DV.

She told me I should just write a statement and give it to the DA saying (something like) I do not wish for my husband to be prosecuted and that I'm not in any danger.

Some DAs will accept that, and some have forms they fill out which essentially says that you agree not to hold the DA, the police, or anyone responsible for any future acts of violence upon you ... and they know that future violence is almost a given without intervention. The problem is that such a statement also serves to weaken the victim's resolve to pursue future action when violence does occur because the victim believes that no one will believe her (a concern often fostered by the abuser), or that she will be made out to be a liar because of previous contradictory statements or actions.

Your situation is not one that is unique. It has happened thousands of times before, and the same scenario plays out in every state and most every city on a daily or weekly basis. Even in my small town, I can see the same story you just told played out again and again ... and the end results are about as predictable as the sun rising. Yes, there are exceptions to the interminable cycle of violence, but it rarely comes about without active intervention. And if you and your husband are disinclined to seek counseling or assistance, then it will almost certainly continue and get worse. Understand that he will make all sorts of promises (likely before he can even legally contact you) about how he will change, he's sorry, he loves you, and that this will never happen again,. And you will believe him because you want to.

The song remains the same.

she said no matter what state I'm in I do not have to testify against my husband

She was WRONG about that one. Yes, you can be made to testify against him.

WHo was this advocate? If this advocate was not from CA, then she should not speak to matters of CA law if she is not aware of them. And, as far as I know, in DV cases there is no spousal immunity in any state. There may be a couple, but if there are, they are few in number and CA is not among them.

And I'm positive that parents don't raise their kids I fear saying omg do not push each other because one day you might go to jail and lose your job. No your parents tell you don't hit girls.

My parents did not differentiate between a push or a hit. Laying hands on another when it is not wanted is, by definition, battery. I was taught that you do not strike a girl. Period. Not that hitting was bad but pushing was okay, or even what the consequences might be. Some things are just plain wrong.

[aardvarc]

As politically incorrect as it may be to discuss, the reality is that no matter who they work for, advocates have agendas of their own, BEYOND assisting the victim across the board. Advocates who work for non-profits or social service agencies may give advice and assistance designed to provide immediate physical safety, sometimes at the expense of future legal issues, such as custody (an advocate who believes that their program participant's life may be in imminent danger may have no trouble shelling out some bucks for a ticket and putting that person on the first bus to the other side of the country - perhaps saving the participant's life, but with the tradeoff of risk of creating legal opportunities for the abuser to raise legal issues regarding removal of children, etc.). For these advocates, preservation of life is the prime directive, all other things being secondary, even sometimes at the expense of a criminal case against the offender or a harder row to plow in civil and custody matters down the line.

On the other hand, an advocate who works for the DA gets to take for granted that the life-saving advocacy has for the most part already occurred thru a group such as the above and thus their focus is getting victims to participate as witnesses - to help the DA - and to help take steps that work towards making victims comfortable or reassured that doing so is in their own best interests. In fact in many states some advocacy services, including things like crime victim compensation programs, aren't even made available unless victims are willing to "play ball" to get either a conviction or a plea. They serve an important role in providing explanations, making sure victim's voices are heard at various stages of the legal process, and walking victims through the veritable maze that is our criminal justice system, and other services - but at the end of the day, their paycheck comes from the prosecutor, not the defense - so their demeanor with victims can sometimes be one of placation and soothing sympathy, rather than "telling it like it is".

Advocates on the criminal justice side (working for prosecutors or law enforcement agencies) focus on enforcement of laws and accountability for offenders, while non criminal justice advocates (non-profits, church groups, social service agencies) seek to break patterns of power and control, to change social and cultural attitudes that foster such violence, and to provide immediate intervention in crisis situations. Sometimes these two work hand in hand with each other - sometimes they are visciously opposed in their goals. So when evaluating advocacy, you really have to start with understanding the stances of the advocate providing that advocacy.

she said no matter what state I'm in I do not have to testify against my husband

If, for example, there was a good plea deal in the bullpen that the DA expected to be picked up, then there wouldn't even be a trial - and thus, absolutely, you wouldn't have to testify. But if there's going to be a trial, and you've got testimony that the DA needs to get a conviction, I'd be expecting to sit on the witness stand if I were you.

I told her all of the things surrounding the case and she also felt that it wasn't handled properly

Clearly the advocate does not know police procedure or the law. She is free to her opinion, but it's likely wrong.

Or, the case WAS handled properly, and the advocate knows it, but there's nothing to be gained by arguing, while trust and eventual cooperation can be gained by playing along, sympathetically, against the big bad "system". Good cop/bad cop stuff.


Displeasure with the various competing interests within the "usual" forms of advocacy is exactly what led to AARDVARC. No "boss", and nothing being "policitally incorrect" means I'm often in a unique position to call things as I see them, as opposed to how some larger power wants them to be seen or presented to others - with the goal of presenting ALL relevant info to victims, and helping them evaluate their situation in a well-rounded, as opposed to "goal focused", manner.