Trying to put the brakes on...

[CdwJava]

You could contact the victim's advocate (or DA's office) and discuss the reality of what had taken place that night.

However, the DA will likely be inclined to be cynical on the victim'
s story if it contradicts what was said the night of the incident. if it merely reiterates what was said, then the DA will still likely act as he or she would have. if he or she were inclined to purse the matter, they will. if they were inclined to drop it, they will.

Do not be intimidated. If you do not think you were a victim of a crime -- and you only wanted her to cool off and prevent an arguement -- you may certainly explain this to district's attorney. Inlight of this evidence he will likely dismiss the case.

You have no idea whether the DA will drop the case with the victim's explanation. Apparently your experience is different than mine. In my state, many county prosecutors will provide the victim a document indicating that they do not wish to pursue prosecution and they agree to hold the DA, the court, and law enforcement harmless for their lack of action. But, my state does not have a malicious touching statute, and vandalism of one's own property in a DV incident is rarely ever filed as a crime.

Someone had mentioned that 75% of the victims recant. However; one must consider the source of this statistic.

The original source I found and use here (75%) was from a lengthy tome on the study of battered women's syndrome circa 1999 (the name escapes me at the moment and I have no idea where it is at the moment). However, perhaps the 2009 Brigham Young University Law Review is a better source - they cite a figure of 80% of domestic violence victims as being "uncooperative." I can cite others from similarly peer-reviewed journals if you'd like, but the numbers are similarly staggering.

There is a bias and thus it is unrealiable information. We can only rely on the Courts to ultimate sort out truth and justice to the best of its abilities.

The percentages are what they are. A victim is either cooperative or uncooperative. The stats indicate a very high rate of uncooperative DV victims - far greater than any other category of crime. And, of course, it is the courts that ultimately decide all of this if the case is filed.

In most first time incidents where no injury has occurred, some for of diversion is available. This often includes counseling and probation until the counseling period has successfully been completed. This may not be available in all states, but the penalties for a first offense tend to be rather small if the suspect agrees to jump through a few hoops. If the suspect here does not want to plead guilty, that is her option.

But, the OP here does not have a choice of counseling or courts. If charges are filed, an attorney WILL be needed as court will be coming.

 

[Alt.Advocate]

However, the DA will likely be inclined to be cynical on the victim's story if it contradicts what was said the night of the incident. if it merely reiterates what was said, then the DA will still likely act as he or she would have. if he or she were inclined to purse the matter, they will. if they were inclined to drop it, they will.

I agree, i'm glad you mentioned that the DA may likely be inclined to be cynical of the victim's story. Both parties involved should be aware of this.

You have no idea whether the DA will drop the case with the victim's explanation. Apparently your experience is different than mine. In my state, many county prosecutors will provide the victim a document indicating that they do not wish to pursue prosecution and they agree to hold the DA, the court, and law enforcement harmless for their lack of action. But, my state does not have a malicious touching statute, and vandalism of one's own property in a DV incident is rarely ever filed as a crime.

From my experience, i'm only illustrating what I think could be a likely out come. Some states have laws that are more severe than others. In any case, if it were me facing such allegations, I would treat the situation very seriously.

The original source I found and use here (75%) was from a lengthy tome on the study of battered women's syndrome circa 1999 (the name escapes me at the moment and I have no idea where it is at the moment).

So long as we can prove the figures are unbiased. I doubt it because the "recant" could also be the truth and after all; that is what we're after.

In most first time incidents where no injury has occurred, some for of diversion is available. This often includes counseling and probation until the counseling period has successfully been completed. This may not be available in all states, but the penalties for a first offense tend to be rather small if the suspect agrees to jump through a few hoops. If the suspect here does not want to plead guilty, that is her option.

Unfortunately in some states there is no diversion program. If you are charged and take a plea deal (in which you must enter a plea of guilty) you will lose some very important constitutional rights, possibly your employment if something like this is on the record, money, time, and so on.

But, the OP here does not have a choice of counseling or courts. If charges are filed, an attorney WILL be needed as court will be coming.

Allow the gentlemen to atleast contact the DA and find out whether or not he really will need an attorney once the DA office makes its intentions clear for this particular case.

I appreciate your comments, they further illustrate our views on the matter and ought to be helpful additions to the thread.

 

[Artemis_ofthe_Hunt]

I agree, i'm glad you mentioned that the DA may likely be inclined to be cynical of the victim's story. Both parties involved should be aware of this.



From my experience, i'm only illustrating what I think could be a likely out come. Some states have laws that are more severe than others. In any case, if it were me facing such allegations, I would treat the situation very seriously.



So long as we can prove the figures are unbiased. I doubt it because the "recant" could also be the truth and after all; that is what we're after.



Unfortunately in some states there is no diversion program. If you are charged and take a plea deal (in which you must enter a plea of guilty) you will lose some very important constitutional rights, possibly your employment if something like this is on the record, money, time, and so on.



Allow the gentlemen to atleast contact the DA and find out whether or not he really will need an attorney once the DA office makes its intentions clear for this particular case.

I appreciate your comments, they further illustrate our views on the matter and ought to be helpful additions to the thread.

Please quote the corresponding statutes that support your inane suppositions and presumptions that your illustrious 'experience' has given you the insight to be able to predict what is going to happen in this case.

 

[CdwJava]

So long as we can prove the figures are unbiased. I doubt it because the "recant" could also be the truth and after all; that is what we're after.

It is hard to be biased when asking if the victim cooperated or not. It's either "yes" or "no." No real room for bias unless you break it down into the reason for the lack of cooperation (in San Diego County where I used to work, they did just that).

Almost all the research points to numbers at or above 75% for victims recanting (trying to withdraw or change the original story to the police). This phenomenon is so prevalent that they write books on it.

Unfortunately in some states there is no diversion program. If you are charged and take a plea deal (in which you must enter a plea of guilty) you will lose some very important constitutional rights, possibly your employment if something like this is on the record, money, time, and so on.

There are almost always options even if no codified form of diversion exists. DAs and courts can be creative. Whether it exists in the OP's state or not, who knows? His wife's attorney can tell her.

Allow the gentlemen to atleast contact the DA and find out whether or not he really will need an attorney once the DA office makes its intentions clear for this particular case.

I'm not preventing him. However, every time he speaks to the DA he runs the risk of doing more harm to his wife's case. Inadvertent comments about things that have happened in the past, or about this incident, could do more harm than good. It would be best for him to l;ay back, get her an attorney, and let that attorney do the talking.

 

[Proserpina]

Please quote the corresponding statutes that support your inane suppositions and presumptions that your illustrious 'experience' has given you the insight to be able to predict what is going to happen in this case.

I note with interest that your request was ignored....

 

[Bruno]

Words to live by:

"The police are not relationship counselors. DO NOT CALL THEM UNLESS YOU WANT THEM TO ACTUALLY DO THEIR JOB."