New Column: Maine’s Adoption of Primary Aggressor Doctrine in DV Arrests Will Ensnare Innocent Men
My new co-authored column, Maine’s Adoption of Primary Aggressor Doctrine in DV Arrests Will Ensnare Innocent Men (Lewiston Sun Journal, 8/5/07), criticizes 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 column appears below.
New Column: Maine’s Adoption of Primary Aggressor Doctrine in DV Arrests Will Ensnare Innocent Men
By Mike McCormick and Glenn Sacks
LD 1039, which was recently signed by Governor Baldacci, requires law enforcement agencies to adopt a “process to evaluate and determine who is the predominant physical aggressor in a domestic violence situation.” While this sounds reasonable, in reality the predominant aggressor doctrine functions as a method of directing police officers to arrest men, not women, when responding to domestic disturbance calls.
The stakes here are high. Because Maine also has a mandatory arrest law in domestic violence cases, instituting the predominant aggressor doctrine will lead to the arrests of many innocent men. Since Maine family courts must consider evidence of domestic violence in determining child custody, an officer’s decision on who to arrest can often determine who will get custody of the couple’s children after the couple divorces or separates.
Under the predominant aggressor doctrine, when police officers respond to a domestic disturbance call, they are instructed not to focus on who attacked whom and who inflicted the injuries, but instead consider different factors which will almost always weigh against men. These factors include: comparable size; comparable strength; the person allegedly least likely to be afraid; who has access to or control of family resources (i.e., who makes more money); and others. Given these factors, it is very difficult for officers to arrest female offenders. (more…)
|
| More from Glenn Sacks
Stumble It!
August 6th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
So….. under this misandry-laden bit of public policy, a woman can decide that she’s wants a free ride with no responsibilities by calling the police to report that her husband attacked her, then hanging up and attacking her husband, reporting that any wounds on him were infliced through “self-defense”, even if he’s mortally injured.
Either way, men lose. And yet another good reason not to marry in America.
August 6th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Maine is following Tasmania. Here the Police do the same thing with a ‘tick the box ‘ form which includes items such as being unemployed being depressed and expressing innocence at being arrested. Points are awarded for around thirty issues, few of which have anything to do with the incident. The man is automatically arrested in 97% of the cases and NO BAIL is permitted. Objecting to arrest carries points. Claiming innocence carries points. The police on the spot fill in the form with no input from health professionals. It can take three months to be brought before a magistrate and that depends upon the man signing an undertaking and ‘proving’ that he is no future ‘threat’, during which time those who are employed lose their jobs as well as their family. Of course, it all goes against the man in any Family Court case. Just how can one ‘prove’ a future negative?
August 6th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
the femi-porkers in the domestic violence racket should have to face the families they have destroyed!!
Turn youre anger into effective action!! support and promote the mens activism movement!!
August 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
To what extent must the injuries be to the primary aggressor before there is equivocal evidence that HE is not the aggressor? Near death? Maimed? Mortal?
Is this statute basically a license to kill for a women, requiring only a simple rational explanation of fearfulness?
August 6th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
This kind of legislation is exactly why I created my Web site, DontMakeHerMad.com, to teach men how to “prove innocence” in the event that they are ever falsely accused. If you live in an abusive household, or if your partner may be having an affair, you are a prime candidate for a false allegation. Do NOT leave the house abruptly unless your safety is threatened; it will be considered willful abandonment. As my Web site says, use surveillance techniques to document a pattern of abuses. There are many ways to do this without arousing suspicion. And if you have kids, you had better do something like this or risk losing them to your abusive partner (which makes them the newest targets of the wife’s abuses — whether physical, emotional, or both).
Abusive women and cheating women must be demonstrated to be abusers, and in the face of a primary aggressor law, only surveillance presents a sure-fire reliable way to deflect false criminal charges away from oneself.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:57 am
New York City Council legislation to make illegal saying “bitch” or “ho”.
“The term is hateful and deeply sexist, said Councilwoman Darlene Mealy of Brooklyn, who has introduced a measure against the word, saying it creates “a paradigm of shame and indignity” for all women.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/nyregion/07bword.html?ei=5090&en=8bb9b60b7da0d2ed&ex=1344139200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print
Feminist (man bad, woman good) legislation
August 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
When it comes to Amerikan government, domestic violence, and VAWA, it helps to understand from the start that Amerika is nothing more than a hate movement against men. Femi Klux Klanners and Feminazis control this area of government with evil tyrannical power, and the rest of the elected politicians just acquiesce to every evil lie and scam coming from the devilish tyrants like blood sucking toadies they truly are.