When prosecuting criminal domestic violence cases too many officers constructed their entire case only on statements made by the victim. However, “victims of domestic violence are more likely than victims of other violent crime to recant or refuse to cooperate in prosecutorial efforts” (Breitenbach, 2008, p. 1256). Officers must consider that victims of domestic violence may refuse to testify because of fear of retaliation, intimidation, financial dependence, emotional attachment, and/or because they reunited with the batterer. If the victim refused to testify during court, their statement against the abuser becomes hearsay evidence. Several recent cases have had a huge influence on how those statements and hearsay evidence may be utilized in court without the victim’s testimony.
In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Crawford v Washington and found that testimonial assertions were not exceptions to the hearsay rule (Breitenbach, 2008). Since the purpose of a testimonial statement was to prove and/or establish facts in a case, the defendant had a right to cross examination of that testimony. This right was termed the Confrontation Clause. Due to the confusion created by the Crawford standard, the Supreme Court provided more parameters in Davis v Washington in June 2006 (Ewing, 2007). Davis established victim accounts as either testimonial or non-testimonial. The courts also believed this included statements taken during the course of an interrogation conducted by law enforcement. If the declarations were acquired by law enforcement to determine an ongoing emergency then they were identified by the court as non-testimonial and not subject to the requirements of the Confrontation Clause. If the statements we...
... middle of paper ...
...ion of the victim.
Works Cited
Breitenbach, K. G. (2008, Fall). Battling the threat: the successful prosecution of domestic violence after Davis v. Washington. Albany Law Review, 71(4), 1255+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA200252467&v=2.1&u=chazsu_main&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w
Byrom, C. E. (2005). The Use of the Excited Utterance Hearsay Exception in the Prosecution of Domestic Violence Cases After Crawford v. Washington. Review Of Litigation, 24(2), 409-428.
Ellison, L. L. (2002). Prosecuting Domestic Violence without Victim Participation. Modern Law Review, 65(6), 834-858.
Ewing, D. (2007). Prosecuting Batterers in the Wake of Davis and Hammon. American Journal Of Criminal Law, 35(1), 91-106.
Pence, E. & Paymar, M. (2001). Domestic violence: The law enforcement response. Minneapolis, MN: Law Enforcement Resource Center.
Pennington, B, E., S. (2014, September 19). In Domestic Violence Cases, N.F.L. Has a History of Lenience . Retrieved from
In 1990, Brenda Koss shot her husband, Michael, while he slept and killed him consequently. Brenda Koss and a number of other witnesses testified about Michael’s ongoing abusive behaviors toward her. The Ohio Supreme Court recognized BWS as a defense in a criminal case. The Koss case is an example of how the law and perception on BWS evolved. In 1981, the state high court had refused to allow the admission of any evidence on BWS, believing that it had not yet been scientifically validated to sufficient extent. However in State v. Koss case, the court found that the professional literature and psychiatric understanding of BWS had very much improved; therefore, the court reversed itself and held that expert testimony on BWS could be admitted in a trial. The Court held that evidence of BWS was admissible through an expert testimony to help prove an element of self-defense —that is, Brenda Koss had a bona fide belief that she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that her only means of escape was the use of force (Bettman, 2011). This case illustrates how the court changed its opinion and perception on BWS as the public started to understand more about BWS and battered women. Unlike State v. Stewart (1988), BWS was positively used to support battered women’s acts of self-defense. Shortly after the Koss case was decided, the legislature passed a law recognizing and validating BWS; it permits the use of expert testimony in support of the defense.
Taylor, N & Joudo, J. 2005. “The impact of pre-recorded video and closed circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: an experimental study”, Research and Public Policy Series, No. 68, Australian Institute of Criminology.
Throughout the years, this clause has been very controversial. In the 2004 case, Crawford vs. Washington; Michael Crawford and his wife, Sylvia Crawford had approached a man by the name of Kenneth Lee. There had been alleged allegations that Lee had tried to rape Mrs. Crawford. In the midst of the confrontation, Michael Crawford stabbed Lee in his torso. Michael then claimed he only did it acting in self-defense because he thought Lee had just picked up a weapon and was going to attack him first. In the trial for this case, Mrs. Crawford declined to testify against her husband, and was not required to do so under spousal privilege. However, her testimonial statement was later used against her husband because the facts of her statement and the facts in his statements were a little different. Noticeably, whether Lee was armed and made an advance prior to his stabbing came into question. Mr. Crawford was charged with assault and attempted murder. He was found guilty. The court found Crawford guilty based on his wife’s recorded statements, describing the stabbing that took place that the prosecutors played in court. The statement contradicted Michael’s defense that he stabbed Lee in self-defense of his wife. After this incident, the Confrontation Clause was put into effect. It serves two purposes. First, it protects the defendant from statements made outside of a court being used against a person when they have no opportunity to test or challenge the alleged statement, and second the Confrontation Clause gives a defendant the oppor...
The question raised in the Hawthorne v. State amicus was related to the expert testimony of Dr. Lenore E. Walker, a Clinical Psychologist with extensive involvement in the study and research of “battered woman syndrome.” Amicus indicated Dr. Walker’s testimony would provide the Trier of facts with expert opinion on a battered woman’s belief that resorting to the use of deadly force against her husband was required, if the woman had perceived imminent death or bodily hard to herself and/or her children. Dr. Walker would clarify battered woman’s syndrome to the jury including clarifying all the relevant stages, cycles of violence, symptoms and reasons why women choose to stay with the abuser.
The State of Texas and TCFV along with the city of Houston have recently hosted a program called “Partner to Protect: A Leadership Summit for Family Violence Programs and Law Enforcement.” This conference was formed to help victim advocates and law enforcement come up with better ways to respond to family violence in the community. The summit allowed advocated and law enforcement to share their expertise on domestic violence while explaining the in’s and out’s of associated with their jobs in order to help victims better understand any type of flaws that could happen during and emergency situation.
Domestic Violence is a widely recognized issue here in the United States. Though many people are familiar with domestic violence, there are still many facts that people do not understand. Abuse is not just physical, it is mental, emotional, verbal, sexual and financial. Many victims of physical abuse are also fall victim to these abuse tactics as well. An abusive partner often uses verbal, mental, emotional, and financial abuse to break their partner so to speak. It is through this type of abuse the victim often feels as though they are not adequately meeting their partner’s needs.
Fradella, H.F. (2006) Why judges should admit expert testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. Federal Courts Law Review. Retrieved from http://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/html/2006/fedctslrev3.pdf
Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Domestic violence information manual. The Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project: The Manual. Retrieved March 25, 2014, from http://www.eurowrc.org/05.education/education_en/12.edu_en.htm
The Boston Police Department has started enforcing new laws that require an officer to make an arrest when responding to cases of domestic violence. This is a strict new law that is being enforced. Previously, it was not necessary to make an arrest for such an incident. The officer had to make sure that the parties were safe and could judge on what action to carry out next. Now, it is a requirement by law to make an arrest if they respond to any case of domestic violence. It is important to study whether enactment of this new law has led to a change in behavior of people in intimate relationships regarding domestic violence.
Vallas, G. (2011). A survey of federal and state standards for the admission of expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitnesses. American Journal of Criminal Law, 39(1), 97-146. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.pioproxy.carrollu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&custid=s6222004&db=aph&AN=74017401&site=ehost-live&scope=site
...’ testimony at trial. This rule has played a big role in the American system like in the case of Mapp V. Ohio. Ohio police officers had gone to a home of a women to ask her question about a recent bombing and requested to search her house. When she denied them access, they arrested her and searched her house which led them to find allegedly obscene books, pictures, and photographs.
There are many sad scenarios that come to mind when thinking about the victims of domestic violence. With this particular issue, the victims are impacted mentally and physically. A situation that comes to mind is one of a little boy hiding under his bed. He is in a neighboring room and can hear furniture moving and screams of his mother in agonizing pain. He understands that he is too small to intervene on his mother’s behalf and too scared to confront his father. What is he left to do? The young boy calls 911 with the hopes that they could step in and end his mother’s pain. The boy’s father repeatedly abused his mother and insisted that she stay in her place and never considers ending the relationship. This fictional situation is one that occurs everyday in every corner of our country. Domestic violence incidents in 2005 accoun...
Thesis: In my paper, I will be examining the different types, possible causes, and effects of Intimate Partner Violence, and what treatments or programs are available to combat this growing problem in America. Regardless of differing approaches to fight it, statistics show that women all across the world suffer from the effects of domestic violence at a similar rate independent of class, race, or religion.
Domestic violence is not just fighting, hitting or an occasional argument. It’s a chronic abuse of power. The abuser of domestic violence, controls and tortures the victim of threats, intimidation, and physical violence. Domestic violence is one of the leading causes of violence in America. The abusers are not only men, women can be abusers as well. Women make up the vast majority of domestic violence. According to the American Bar Association (ABA), 90-95% of domestic violence victims are females and 70% of intimidating homicides are females. Domestic violence is a serious crime and everyone needs to be aware of its effects. This essay presents and explains the evidence supporting the major risk factors for intimate partner homicides.