Monday, July 24, 2006
Family Court is not Equipped to Deal w/Criminal Issues
It's simply wrong to say that if so-&-so is guilty, s/he'd be in jail. For one thing, we all can recount many public cases which ended in no conviction, or a conviction being turned over on a technicality that had nothing to do with the person's guilt or innocence.
The system is far more complex than that. Abusers often deflect criminal allegations by turning them into a "custody" issue if children are involved. This can be done by filing for sole custody in response to a child's disclosures of abuse, or to a mother's allegations of domestic violence.
In the case of criminal allegations, if the accused is innocent, why doesn't the accused go to the police station and make a sworn statement? Offer to take a polygraph? Offer to assist with an investigation in any way possible?
Turning the situation into a "custody battle" is a tactical way to cast doubt on a child's, or an (ex)spouse's, disclosures. Most importantly, it is a way to bring Parental Alienation Syndrome into the picture to cloud the issue. You can't allege PAS in criminal court, but you can in family court. (However, that's starting to change, now that the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has come out against the use of PAS).
Anyone who knows anything about criminal cases that involve families of divorce knows how unwilling public agencies (CPS, police) are to get involved. "That's what family courts are for," they say. However, family court is NOT equipped to deal with criminal issues in any substantive way.
Family court uses court-appointed psychologists to determine, essentially, how "likely" it is that such disclosures are true. That's pretty much the only standard family court uses. Is it "likely"? Not very accurate, is it? So of course, this creates a self-perpetuating cycle. After family court dismisses allegations of abuse based on the use of PAS or sub-par forensic work, that allows CPS and police stations to refuse to follow up: "Well, family court didn't find anything,". CPS and the police aren't going to follow up on cases that have had findings made in another court, unless perhaps another round of disclosures follows later on. It's highly problematic.
posted by Txfeminist @ 8:15 AM
3 Comments:
· At Mon Jul 24, 07:56:11 PM PDT, n said…
Agreed. It is highly problematic.First - CPS is supposed to be notified and act immediately. They are not allowed to defer a case 'because a custody dispute is ongoing'. They are obligated to protect the child. What is the status of their investigation? A failure to act implies that they have decided that abuse did not occur when they may have simply neglected their job. Second - The criminal justice system is also activated immediately on notification of a crime. They proceed at a slower pace than CPS, but they are also obligated to proceed. What is the status of their investigation? Did a Grand Jury hear the case? Was there insufficient evidence to obtain an arrest? An active criminal case should actually enjoin (is that the correct word) a family custody case on the same line on the grounds that it may undermine the criminal case. The third problem in such cases is that both sides can procure experts who upon reviewing the case will come to completely different conclusions as to what happened. Case in point: Mya George caseWrongful Death Suit Involving 3-Year-Old Advances ($8MM dollar verdict)http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=3638724 {This one also begged the point as to whether State Senators should be allowed to sue the state} Their case should precede any dispute in custody courts. It's simply wrong to say that if so-and-so is guilty, s/he'd be in jail. For one thing, we all can recount many public cases which ended in no conviction, or a conviction being turned over on a technicality that had nothing to do with the person's guilt or innocence. The system is far more complex than that. Abusers often deflect criminal allegations by turning them into a "custody" issue if children are involved. This can be done by filing for sole custody in response to a child's disclosures of abuse, or to a mother's allegations of domestic violence. In the case of criminal allegations, if the accused is innocent, why doesn't the accused go to the police station and make a sworn statement? Offer to take a polygraph? Offer to assist with an investigation in any way possible? Turning the situation into a "custody battle" is a tactical way to cast doubt on a child's, or an (ex)spouse's, disclosures. Most importantly, it is a way to bring Parental Alienation Syndrome into the picture to cloud the issue. You can't allege PAS in criminal court, but you can in family court. (However, that's starting to change, now that the National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges has come out against the use of PAS). Anyone who knows anything about criminal cases that involve families of divorce knows how unwilling public agencies (CPS, police) are to get involved. "That's what family courts are for," they say. However, family court is NOT equipped to deal with criminal issues in any substantive way. Family court uses court-appointed psychologists to determine, essentially, how "likely" it is that such disclosures are true. That's pretty much the only standard family court uses. Is it "likely"? Not very accurate, is it? So of course, this creates a self-perpetuating cycle. After family court dismisses allegations of abuse based on the use of PAS or sub-par forensic work, that allows CPS and police stations to refuse to follow up: "Well, family court didn't find anything,". CPS and the police aren't going to follow up on cases that have had findings made in another court, unless perhaps another round of disclosures follows later on. It's highly problematic.
· At Tue Jul 25, 07:25:52 AM PDT, Txfeminist said…
CPS routinely dismisses issues that are tied up in family court. Their opinion is that family court will "take care of it". They are so overburdened with cases they're happy to hand stuff over, even though procedurally they're wrong to do so. Child sexual abuse cases are hard to prosecute. It depends on the age of the child, the clarity of his/her disclosures, other corroborating evidence. I have read of many cases prosecuted on the child's testimony alone. Generally those children are older than eight. Younger children are perceived as less credible. CPS and other agencies can easily screw up when questioning the child, too. If any line of questioning is considered "tainted" (there are VERY specific procedures for questioning a child about sexual abuse) it's not going to hold up in court.
· At Wed Jul 26, 08:49:44 PM PDT, N said…
...they are so overburdened with cases... 1) Why are they so overburdened? 2) What is the percentage of cases being ruled 'proven'? CPS and other agencies can easily screw up when questioning the child and the concequences for everybody can be very severe. On the false testimony of a 9 and 11 year old, this lady died. Sarah Good - Hanged July 19, 1692 "Nine-year-old Elizabeth Parris and eleven-year-old Abigail Williams began to exhibit strange behavior, such as blasphemous screaming, convulsive seizures, trance-like states and mysterious spells. Within a short time, several other Salem girls began to demonstrate similar behavior."exerted:http://www.salemweb.com/memorial/
No comments:
Post a Comment