Do The Police Have to Arrest a Spouse Accused of Domestic Violence

[Pilotswife]

My question involves civil rights in the State of: Georgia.

My husband bit me, disabled me, police refuse to arrest him because he's a Delta pilot.

[cdwjava]

Uh ... I can't imagine that the police refused to arrest someone because he was a pilot. Honestly, why would they care? If so, that's very peculiar.

Perhaps you'd care to post a little more detail?

[Highwayman]

Perhaps you'd care to post a little more detail?

Indeed. I'm also curious as to how the OP was "disabled".

[PTPD22]

Most states (perhaps all?) have domestic violence laws that take away much of the discretion that law enforcement officers have in other types of crimes regarding whether or not to effect an arrest. That being said, DV incidents frequently involve complex dynamics, heightened emotions, physical actions by BOTH parties, and can be fuzzy in the details…and the details matter. It can be difficult for police to make any conclusive determination of what, exactly, happened during the incident.

Generally, police are required to make an arrest only when ALL of the following can be established:
A. A domestic relationship exists between the involved parties (states differ in defining what constitutes a “domestic relationship” and I’m too lazy to research what the definition is in GA right now. But, undoubtedly, a married couple is included.) AND
B. Sufficient evidence exists to establish probable cause that actual physical force was used (commonly this is redness, swelling, bruising, etc. but more than just simply a claim by victim). AND
C. Evidence points to one party as the “primary aggressor." Meaning, the person who primarily used physical force offensively rather than defensively.

This is where the details become important. You have not shared the details in your incident so I cannot comment about your specific circumstances. But, let me share a hypothetical to make my point. The police show up and determine that you and your husband are married – A is established. You show them a bite mark on your arm – B is established and things are leaning toward C as well. BUT, your husband claims that he only bit you because you grabbed him around the neck from behind and were choking him, and has redness on his neck to support this. You claim he bit you unprovoked and the redness on his neck is from you pushing him away to make him release the bite. If that is all the evidence there is, how do the police make any conclusive determination as to who was the primary aggressor? C remains unresolved and the police likely lack probable cause to arrest either of you.