My recent co-authored column, Maine’s Adoption of Predominant Aggressor Doctrine in DV Arrests Will Ensnare Innocent Men (Lewiston Sun Journal, 8/5/07), criticizes Maine's LD 1039, a domestic violence bill. Combining with other misguided laws and policies, the bill essentially makes a street cop responding to a 911 call the arbiter of child custody, and of whether the children involved will have their fathers in their futures or not. The bill was recently signed into law in Maine.

Gretchen Ziemer, legislative coordinator for the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence (one of the organizations which pushed LD 1039), and John B. Rogers, director of the Maine Criminal Justice Academy, state the case in  favor of the bill in their column Identifying aggressors brings context to crises (Lewiston Sun Journal, 8/12/07). It's the second half of a point/counterpoint that the Sun Journal published on the issue. My column (linked above) was published the previous Sunday.

The Ziemer/Rogers column appears below, with my comments in italics inserted.

Identifying aggressors brings context to crises

Sunday, August 12, 2007

The complexities of domestic violence cases require policies to help police comprehend abuse situations.

The Maine Criminal Justice Academy, the Maine Department of Public Safety, the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence and Rep. Deb Simpson, D-Auburn, united this past legislative session around LD 1309, a bill adopting police policies and education about proper "predominant aggressor" identification and enforcement.The International Association of Chiefs of Police defines predominant aggressor as "the person who poses the most serious ongoing threat," while realizing "an injury resulting from...self-defense is neither abuse nor a crime."

[The "person who poses the most serious ongoing threat" is code for "arrest the man." The man, because of his greater size, will almost always be perceived as being the "most serious ongoing threat." The idea that when women hit or abuse men, it's only (or usually) in self-defense has been discredited by research for many years. In reality, most men and women hit in self-defense in about equal numbers, and most blows by either gender are not struck in self-defense.]

Since 1984, mandatory arrest laws have been implemented to punish and deter domestic abuse. The complexity of domestic violence requires a judicial response that encourages police, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, bail commissioners, etc. to understand the context of domestic violence and examine each case individually.Criminalizing domestic violence with mandatory arrest laws started with the concept batterers wouldn't stop until the community thought of their actions as crimes. Activists also believed criminalization would stigmatize the batterer.

["Criminalizing domestic violence with mandatory arrest laws started with the concept batterers wouldn't stop until the community thought of their actions as crimes" is a big leap. Yes, it is true that having the community think of domestic violence as a "crime" does deter batterers, and this society-wide awareness is one of the many positive things the feminist movement did.

In previous eras, the attitude towards domestic violence tended to be more of the "it's between the two of you, keep it off the street" variety. However, there is a big difference between treating DV as a crime and mandatory arrest.

What mandatory arrest laws often do is create arrests where there has not been a crime. There's a 911 call, the officers are pressured to make an arrest, they're pressured to arrest men ("perps") not women. As a result, many, many innocent men have been thrown into the domestic violence system, and prosecuted because of "No drop" prosecution policies.]

As time passed, the Legislature enacted laws giving officers more arrest authority, victims more protection with bail conditions and protective orders and required police to have better domestic violence policies and training.

[The statement that laws have been "giving officers more arrest authority" is misleading--they've made it easier for officers to make arrests, but they've stripped officers of their authority and discretion to size up a DV situation and make an intelligent decision on it. Instead, hands tied, officers are often forced to arrest men in situations where it is very unclear that they engaged in any violence.]

Yet, according to the Maine Department of Public Safety, the crime of Domestic Assault, as reported to police, occurs every 96 minutes. (Maine Department of Public Safety, Uniform Crime Report, 2005.) Mandatory arrest was encouraged by most police agencies to help stop the crime, but not as the sole response to domestic violence. Mandatory arrest was meant to work with other means to end domestic violence.Mandatory arrest transformed the justice system response nationally, but with costs. It has led to increased dual arrests and female victims arrested for domestic violence. Numerous studies show the drastic increase in female arrests is not from an increase of women perpetrators, but from women protecting themselves.

[Fair arrest policies would result in far more women being arrested, not less, because now women are able to commit DV largely with impunity. The dominant aggressor doctrine (and LD 1039) shield women who abuse men or engage in mutual violence from being held legally accountable for their actions.]

To address these problems, many states adopted predominant aggressor language to contextualize domestic violence and recognize that acts of violence might be self-defense. By its volatile nature, domestic violence crimes are layered in power and control manipulations. Victims use complex strategies to reduce risks for themselves and their children. They are always considering myriad consequences when pursuing options for safety.

If the victim calls police, pursues a protective order or leaves the abuser, it may curtail immediate abuse. Yet these options may escalate perpetrators' violence, including threats against children or the victim.Half of the homicides in Maine from 1996 to 2006 stemmed from domestic violence. Predominant aggressor identification is the next step to support the abused, hold batterers accountable and increase public safety.

Predominant aggressor does not refer to who struck first. It applies when both parties use violence towards each other, but the distinction occurs when the victim is in fear of imminent bodily injury.

["It applies when both parties use violence towards each other, but the distinction occurs when the victim is in fear of imminent bodily injury"--in other words, it's mutual combat, and there should be a dual arrest, but instead we arrest only the man, not because of anything he's done but because he's bigger than the women. That's is one hell of an admission these authors are making.]

The predominant aggressor is most responsible for the violence, used a higher level of violence, has an established history of violence and represents an ongoing threat of violence. To determine who used more substantial force, officers are trained to examine level of injuries, the history of violence, as well as answering who is afraid of who.

[I can go along with who has an "established history of violence," although even then, previous arrests based on gender bias may pollute the record. "Who is afraid of who" is code for "arrest the man."]

At the academy, new law enforcement officers are taught to assess situations where danger is imminent and use appropriate force to subdue the threat, to protect themselves or protect another, as anyone can.

[Actually, at the academy, new law enforcement officers are taught to always blame the man for the DV situation. I often hear from police officers who tell me how they are "trained" and "coerced" to put their common  sense and experience aside and pretend that only men should be arrested for DV.]

It is important for police to identify predominant aggressors to avoid arresting the wrong party or both parties. By failing to hold batterers accountable, police would hand the batterer another tool to control their partner.

["It is important for police to identify predominant aggressors to avoid arresting the wrong party or both parties." Translation--"It is important for police to avoid arresting women."]

Also, survivors of domestic violence are often primary caregivers for children. This creates situations in which the true victims will be re-victimized by the criminal justice system if a parent is improperly arrested.Proper predominant aggressor identification and enforcement is not new for Maine. It's part of basic academy training; in the last seven years, about 700 law enforcement officers have been trained in these new techniques.

But there are about 2,500 full-time and 1,000 part-time officers in Maine. This mandate will provide training for all officers, not only recent graduates. It also ensures police adopt predominant aggressor identification protocols in responding to a domestic violence call. This will provide a consistent response for all citizens across Maine.Through additional training, officers will develop a greater understanding of domestic violence's complexities. For the court system, predominant aggressor identification will provide for more thorough investigations, so prosecutors and courts can better hold batterers accountable for criminal behavior.

["Through additional training, officers will develop a greater understanding of domestic violence's complexities." No, the average street cop knows all about DV's "complexities," and knows that women are at least as likely to abuse their men as vice versa. This "training" is conducted by the feminist-dominated domestic violence industry, for the purpose of getting cops to put aside what they know and instead follow politically-correct, anti-male arrest policies.]

"Utilizing predominant aggressor identification will also provide an accurate account of the immediate crisis and a holistic view of the situation as well. This gives more tools to the justice system to increase safety for victims, and their families, hold batterers accountable and add to the stigma of being a batterer.

[I agree that there should be a stigma against batterers, though that stigma has existed to various degrees for centuries. A "holistic view of the situation" means that cops shouldn't look at what actually transpired in a  DV situation, but instead should view the "larger situation" as relayed to them by the feminist domestic violence industry. What that means is women are victims and men are batterers.]

To learn more about problems with the domestic violence system, see:

• DV Expert John Hamel:  'Majority of Mainstream Researchers are now Acknowledging the  Gender-Inclusive Nature of Intimate Partner Abuse'
• My co-authored column Texas Bill to Create Domestic Violence Offender Registry Will Harm Innocent  Men (Austin American-Statesman, 4/11/07)
• My co-authored column  CA Legislators Vote to Protect Pets from Domestic Violence but Deny Services  to Male DV Victims (Long Beach Press-Telegram, 4/21/07)
• My co-authored column Simpson Case Led to Harmful Domestic Violence Policies (Riverside Press-Enterprise, 12/5/06)
• My co-authored column Letterman  Case Shows Problems with Restraining Orders (Albuquerque Tribune, 1/17/06)
• My column VAWA  Renewal Provides Opportunity to Stop Destruction of  Innocent Cops' Careers (Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, 7/19/05)
• My column Domestic Violence Treatment Policies Put Abused Women in Harm's Way (Daily Breeze [Los Angeles], 11/7/05)
• My co-authored column Brett Myers Case Obscures an Important Truth About Domestic Violence Arrests  (Delaware County Daily Times [Philadelphia], 8/2/06)
• My co-authored column Domestic Violence Lawsuit Will Help Secure Services for All Abuse Victims (Los Angeles Daily Journal, San Francisco Daily Journal, 12/28/05)
• My column Domestic Violence Series Substitutes Emotion for Facts  (San Francisco Chronicle, 4/8/05)
• My column New Report on Maternal Homicide Crisis: Myth-Making and Manbashing (Lexington Herald-Leader, 1/3/05)

[Note: If you or someone you love is being abused, the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women provides crisis intervention and support services to victims of domestic violence and their families.]

This entry was posted on Monday, August 20th, 2007 at 6:09 pm and is filed under Family Law, Feminism/NOW, Domestic Violence/DV System, Fathers' Rights/Noncustodial parents' rights, Men's rights, Crime/Criminal Justice System/Police, False Accusations, Sexism, Divorce/Separation/Child Custody, Restraining Orders/Protection Orders, Misandry, Gender Issues (Misc.), Bills/Initiatives, Elections, Politics, Court Cases. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.