Is it time to do more? Intimate Partner/ Domestic Violence

I

iona6656

New member
In Canada, section 718 of the Criminal Code provides for an increased sentence when hate is determined to be an aggravating circumstance.

While gender is in the enumerated group under the section...one can't help but wonder if it's time for the Federal government to look at implementing a similar provision for intimate partner violence, or domestic violence.

If you punch a stranger- let's look at the circumstances and maybe look at alternative sentencing like peace bonds, required anger management counselling, etc...but if you punch your domestic partner? Should it be something more?

I think it is time we look at it. Too many women are dying in these situations. And in many of the cases, there are historical charges against accused. But they are relatively minor in nature (I mean- relative to the charge of murder).

The outcome of these charges are too often a slap on the wrist. You slammed your wife/gf's head against the stairs? Let's send you to a 12 week group course and then send you right back to your wife- so you can beat her some more. Oh- you're wealthy? Don't worry- you can get away with it at least a couple more times, or at least until you kill her.

You can literally beat the shit out of your partner- and simply face anger management counselling if it's your first time. Or maybe nothing at all.

It's time to stop feeling sad and downtrodden when we read about yet another:

Elana Fric
Riya Rajkumar
Shubangi Amin
Holly Hamilton

And so many more.

If you drive drunk once- you lose your licence. On your second conviction- you go to jail. I don't see why a similar system should not be in place now.

Domestic violence and the relationship between the accused and victim SHOULD be an aggravating factor in sentencing.

I'm not sure what the answer is- but I'm going to try to find an answer to this. This is an election issue.


Thoughts?
 
I agree with you whole heartedly. In fact, the case of Elana Fric has been weighing on my heart since the last post on this forum about how from a jail cell he was able to fight for custody of the children just out of spite to drain Elana's parents of a million dollars. Money that could have gone to the children. The system is so effen broken on so many levels. A mentally ill man kills his spouse and he goes to anger management. Is that what he really needs? My exspouse choked me in a psychotic rage. He was ordered anger management! I told the person at the John Howard Society this is fine and dandy but it is not what he needs. He needs to be forced to take meds. Yes, as you say it should be an aggravating factor in sentencing. Your home is supposed to be your safe haven. Your spouse is supposed to make you feel safe always. The laws have to change. The system is so broken.
 
Why is it worse to assault a spouse than a friend or stranger?

Your list of names is nice, but my understanding is that the victims of violence are overwhelmingly male. Your counter may be that the perpetrators are also overwhelmingly male. This leads to my follow up question: If people of my gender commit more crimes, does that mean that I have less right to not be a victim?

Or, let's racialize it.

If one ethnic group commits fewer crimes on average, should an assault on a member of that "less violent" group result in a lengthier sentence? For example, if Japanese commit fewer crimes than Brazilians, should you get a longer sentence for assaulting somebody who is Japanese?
 
Janus said:
Why is it worse to assault a spouse than a friend or stranger?
Click to expand...

It has to do with the nature of the relationship between spouses. There is supposed to be an inherent level of trust. It's a person who has access to your life- who is in the position to control the other person.

Also- we need more of a deterrent. You want to beat on your partner (female or male) or your child- well, you're going to be facing something more.

Your list of names is nice, but my understanding is that the victims of violence are overwhelmingly male. Your counter may be that the perpetrators are also overwhelmingly male. This leads to my follow up question: If people of my gender commit more crimes, does that mean that I have less right to not be a victim?

Or, let's racialize it.

If one ethnic group commits fewer crimes on average, should an assault on a member of that "less violent" group result in a lengthier sentence? For example, if Japanese commit fewer crimes than Brazilians, should you get a longer sentence for assaulting somebody who is Japanese?
Click to expand...

My list of names are names that are preventable.

That's glaring point- these deaths are preventable. They should not be taking place- not every couple of days.

As Stillbreathing points out again, and again, and again- domestic homicide is the MOST preventable homicide.

As a society we need to start taking a stand and saying these actions aren't acceptable. They aren't our values- we do not condone violence in the home- be it against your wife, husband, parent or child. Home is supposed to be a safe haven- and when you have a partner or spouse using their position of trust to harm another person- that warrants something more.
 
Last edited:
iona6656 said:
Also- we need more of a deterrent. You want to beat on your partner (female or male) or your child- well, you're going to be facing something more.
Click to expand...

I'm skeptical about the deterrence value of longer jail sentences. Deterrence is very effective at stopping me from stealing candy from the local grocery store. If I'm willing to commit a serious assault, I'm not sure if I care much about whether the sentence is two years or ten years. At that point I'm assuming that I will not be caught, so the actual sentence is irrelevant.


My list of names are names that are preventable.
Click to expand...

Depending on your definition of preventable, either almost all crimes are preventable, or almost none. I don't think there is a special "preventable" attribute to your list. The main attribute of your list appears to be "victim didn't have a penis, so the crime is more serious".

That's glaring point- these deaths are preventable. They should not be taking place- not every couple of days.
Click to expand...

Which deaths should be taking place?

Is it ok to shoot a gang banger because, well, he's a gang banger?

As a society we need to start taking a stand and saying these actions aren't acceptable.
Click to expand...

I think we do. People go to jail. There is an entire list of actions that are not acceptable. You want to specifically increase the punishment for crimes against a certain victim class, for reasons that are not necessarily axiomatically reasonable.

They aren't our values- we do not condone violence in the home- be it against your wife, husband, parent or child. Home is supposed to be a safe haven- and when you have a partner or spouse using their position of trust to harm another person- that warrants something more.
Click to expand...

If somebody invades my home, does that warrant something more?

If somebody attacks a child, does that warrant something more? Does a stranger get a discount if they attack a child, compared to a family member?

If somebody attacks me while at work, does that warrant something more?

If somebody mugs me while I'm in my backyard, does that warrant something more?

If somebody attacks me while I'm in a public changeroom, and I'm very naked and vulnerable, does that warrant something more?

Lots of places are supposed to be safe havens. Home is just on the list of places that I would count as "should be safe".

Honestly, I think your call to action sounds like Hollywoodism. When men die, that's just business as usual, but the death of a woman is a tragedy. As a male, I don't appreciate my life and bodily integrity being so casually designated as being less worthy of protection for a variety of reasons.
 
I do agree with Iona that domestic violence is more serious than assaults outside the home, mainly because it should be a safe place and it's often very difficult to leave the home.

However, I'm going to drop some data here from a CDC study on domestic violence that indicates that domestic violence is an issue, independent of sex.

In a 2010 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study, reporting on domestic violence in the U.S., 26% of gay men said that they experienced physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners.[21] 29% of heterosexual men reported similar violence in the same study.

The CDC also stated that 40% of lesbian women reported physical violence by their partners, and 44% reported experiencing physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners. In contrast, 35% of heterosexual women reported physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners in the same study.[21]
Click to expand...
 
ifonlyihadknown said:
I do agree with Iona that domestic violence is more serious than assaults outside the home, mainly because it should be a safe place and it's often very difficult to leave the home.

However, I'm going to drop some data here from that indicates that domestic violence is an issue, independent of sex.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. I completely agree.

The names I list are there because they are what is reported in the media- and one of the last ones - Shubangi Amin - her name has *barely* been reported. I have some thoughts on that (*cough* intersectionality. racism. classism. etc etc *cough*)...much less the men that are suffering at the hands of their partners- male and female.

Look at Bruce McArthur- there is definitely concern there that he should have been caught earlier- but a complaint made against him by another gay male was not taken as seriously as it could've/should've been....

that's why we should properly be using the term "intimate partner violence" v. "domestic violence" because DV connotes husband on wife violence. And that is limiting to the issue.


Janus said:
Honestly, I think your call to action sounds like Hollywoodism. When men die, that's just business as usual, but the death of a woman is a tragedy. As a male, I don't appreciate my life and bodily integrity being so casually designated as being less worthy of protection for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...

I have stuff to say to your other responses. but I think you're missing my point. this is not a female/male thing- it's an 'intimate partner' thing.

If men are dying and being abused by females- it's equally as bad.

If you are a man and you get assaulted by another man or woman you are in a relationship with- that's bad. That's intimate partner violence.

The death of people- at the hands of their partners is tragic. The death of children in retaliation against a former partner is even MORE tragic.

Your life and body are not less worthy.

My call to action is this: if you are in a relationship with someone- an intimate relationship. If they hurt you, if they intimidate and use violence or the threat of violence to control you- WHEN charges are brought against them, the nature of the relationship between the accused and victim must factor into the sentencing or outcome.
 
Last edited:
Majority of women make FALSE abuse allegations to get a tactical advantage in family court.
95% of domestic violence allegations during divorce are simply false.
 
rvalentines said:
95% of domestic violence allegations during divorce are simply false.
Click to expand...

As they say: 83% of statistics are just made up on the spot.

Edit: To be clear, I think valentine is making up stuff, not 95% of those alleging domestic violence :)
 
Last edited:
With all due respect to the actual victims of DV, I think there should be equal accountability/punishment for perpetrators of false accusations in terms of perjury, mischief or obstruction of justice charges.

From my own experience at being wrongly charged with assault, I will share that at my criminal trial, it came out that ex, under oath, stated that her family lawyer submitted a motion/affidavit without her knowledge and forged her signature.

This was clearly perjury, but the trial judge simply stated he was troubled my ex's testimony and this hurt her credibility. There were other inconsistencies too but who cares!

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk
 
I agree that accountability needs to be heightened in Family Court. There are no rules and you can say anything, at no cost. My ex did her research on what she needed to say and try to convince the judge in order to get her way.

All of a sudden, I was being accused by my wife of every single kind of abuse, and labeled with every single kind of mental disorder possible. I couldn’t believe how low she stooped. Anyone can do internet research and try to connect dots for convenience. Unless backed up by actual REAL evidence, someone who goes out of their way to maliciously win at all costs should be held accountable.
 
Yes! The poster is right!
Let's imprison men for 10 years for slapping their wives, ensure they never get to see the kids, the wife to get exclusive possession of the house, all the while the father keeps paying child support.

We need to do more in this country to protect women's fundamental right of child support until the kids are 24 years old because during separation process they remember they were assaulted 5 years back.

Kind of like this case:
1. The Parties marries in 2010.
2. The parties entered into a separation agreement in 2013 for custody.
3. Issues arise in Spring of 2018 regarding custody.
4. Then, Fall of 2018, the father was charged with Assault, based upon allegations of historic domestic violence made by the mother.
5. The Mother then uses the bail conditions (No contact order) as leverage to dictate to the Father that he cannot enroll their son in after-school program!
http://canlii.ca/t/j3vkl
 
In my humble view, when the wife signed the agreement in 2013, it meant she was ok with everything. Enough of this stuff of holding something on someone as “back pocket info” where the ex uses it when things don’t go their way. When she signed, the fight was over. Move on, rather than get him arrested years later because she didn’t like something.

What we need is to protect men from being treated as monthly lottery tickets. Too many instances of men struggling to get by because of supports, while ex treats supports as extra subsidies to live it up as they have great job, living in million dollar home and vacations 5 times a year.

Too often men can’t afford a proper legal fight (as they are paying up to 1/2 their pay in CS/SS) to be in kids lives because mom ran off with kids, and you know you don’t have a chance in hell in court if you are not paying your supports.
 
Actually, studies show that abusive men overwhelmingly obtain some sort of favourable outcome in family court. They don't play by the rules and are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want and no one holds them accountable.

I don't think we should be arresting people for minor incidents of assault unless there is clear evidence and the Crown believes they could obtain a conviction at trial. Something like 50% of DV charges are resolved by way of peace bond/withdrawal of charges. The family is broken up and forced into family court to resolve their issues. I was in an abusive marriage for years and stayed in order to avoid the circus of family court because I knew he would never let go. But eventually someone else called police and it was out of my hands.

I actually believe it is unjust to remove a man from his home and break up his family, only to make him do counselling and sign a peace bond. That's BS. If he committed a serious act of assault, he should be IN JAIL. If there isn't enough to put him in jail, then leave him alone. Sooner or later, he will do something and will end up in jail. And then the family issues will be largely resolved because he is IN JAIL.

The current DV laws are intended to try to reform abusers which statistics show is largely unsuccessful. The children aren't safer once the family is broken up- often they are in more danger, especially if the DV charges are "minor". Here's some guys who had a history of "minor" DV (withdrawal of charges and peace bond): Trent Butt, Andrew Berry, Roopesh Rajkumar. Google their names and find out what happened to the kids.

When lying is rewarded in court, regardless of whether it's abusive men or vindictive women, the foundation of the system is corrupt.
 
You are totally missing the other end of the spectrum. The woman who treats the kids as only hers, and wishes to have a subsidized livelihood at the expense of the man. The woman who says "MINE!" when referring to the kids, with a "stay-away-and-pay" attitude towards the father. The woman who does her research on family law and does everything she can to try to win her case for having the kids all to herself, and starts the false allegations. How is that fair to the kids? When the ex goes purposefully out of her way to keep kids to herself? What does that say about her as a mom?

In my case, my ex tried every single tactic and avenue to try to convince a judge that my kids should never see their dad. EVERY ONE. Do I have 2 beers while watching hockey on Wednesday night after the kids are gone to bed? All of a sudden I am a raging alcoholic who drinks alone! Just crazy.

Going down that road didn't work? OK, lets try every type of abuse in the book. She tried to label me with EACH type of abuse. None stuck, and the judges saw her grasping at straws. It was sad to see my former wife call me all sorts of names in court documents. I compared her to a kid in a playground not getting her way.... Unless my ex is a qualified professional in mental health, she has no business calling me terrible things. Anyone can do internet research and find something about their ex to tie them to a mental health issue. My ex gets flustered when overwhelmed, does that give me a license to say that she suffers from an Anxiety Disorder and should be in a mental hospital? And never see the kids? I never would do that, as I actually have a head on my shoulders and see that the kids should spend equal amounts of time with mom AND dad.

We have all been in relationships throughout our lives. There is a big difference between breaking up without kids, and breaking up WITH kids. When there are no kids, you just walk away and say "have a nice life".....you cannot do that when the kids share parents. So both parents need to suck it up and stop stooping to such low levels.
 
I didn't miss the other end of the spectrum, I just didn't address it as it isn't the subject of the thread. That being said, I believe that people who perjure themselves in court ought to be penalized and if courts can't determine who is lying, they shouldn't make judgments that affect children. I have been lied about in court too and suffered the consequences for it. I agree that what some women do to some men is terrible, so I'm sure you can agree that what some men do to some women is also terrible. I know a man who went through much worse than you did, it totally broke him and had lifelong consequences. Not seeing your kids when you are a good and loving parent must be excruciatingly terrible. However, wondering if you will ever see your kids alive again is a whole other ballgame. For me, the thing that has helped me stay sane and keep my head above water is recognizing that as bad as I have it, there are those in even worse situations than myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top