case dismissed - can I recoup bail and attorneys fees

[bravomp]

My daughter and her husband separated and she was living on her own in her own apartment. She tried to reconcile with him and he stayed with her for 2 weeks. He has been verbally abusive in the past and became verbally and physically abusive with her one night. He didn't hit her but was grabbing her by the wrists throwing her around. He pushed her to the ground and put his knee against her neck. All the while yelling profanities. She was able to call 911 and asked for help. He grabbed the phone away from her and hung it up. The 911 operator called back and he answered saying it was a mistake. The police eventually came and took statements from both of them. My daughter told them she just wanted him out of her apartment and down played the physical abuse because she didn't want him arrested. He on the other hand said she had attacked him and had a scratch on his neck to prove it. The officers had him grab his things (which included a marijuana water pipe that they acknowledged seeing)and had him leave. Then they proceeded to arrest my daughter!! She is 5'2" and under 100 lbs. and he is 5'11" and 180 lbs. with a shaved head and an athletic build. He was arrested and served time when he was 17 for beating up some guy after a traffic dispute. Unfortunately, he was tried and charged as a juvenile.

We took her to a doctor the next day and had pictures taken of the bruises on her wrists and body. She also had a sprained finger. It cost me $5,000 to bail her out and another $7,000 for a criminal attorney. The day it went to trial the district attorney said he wanted to dismiss the case and it was.

To me, these officers were clearly inept and rather than protect my daughter they arrested her. It seems wrong that I should have to pay for their ineptitude. I want to recoup what I laid out to fight this false arrest. When I told this to the criminal attorney, he said I shouldn't because they have up to a year to file the same charges against her. Of course he doesn't care because he got his money and didn't have to spend more than a couple of hours on the case!

I'd like to know if it is true that they can file the same charges? Can they get away with a false arrest and we have to pay for it? Something is very wrong with this? Do you have any advice? Also, is it customary to charge a flat rate for criminal defense regardless of the time spent on the case?



[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 12, 2000).]

 

[Tracey]

1. It wasn't a false arrest. The guy claimed she abused him and she didn't dispute his claim or accuse him of DV. As far as police were concerned, she was the abuser. Being small is no defense to DV. A small woman can easily abuse a large man who has been brought up to believe that he should never hit a woman.

2. Many police departments have a 'must arrest' policy regarding domestic violence: any time they have probable cause, they have to arrest the alleged perpetrator. This is to avoid turning beat cops into on the spot judges deciding who to believe.

3. They can refile the charges until the statute of limitations runs out. But they probably won't, since you have pictures of her injuries.

------------------
This is not legal advice and you are not my client. Double check everything with your own attorney and your state's laws.

 

[bravomp]

Thanks for the response, even though it wasn't quite what I had expected. I've been reading about violence against women and found that it is not uncommon for the women not to want to press charges against the man. It seems to me that the police should have taken that into account. You say she didn't dispute his claim, but the police didn't even tell her what he had said! They didn't talk to the neighbors who also heard him throwing my daughter around in the bedroom. Besides he told the police as he was leaving he didn't want to press charges, but then turned to my daughter and said "you better treat me right from now on or I will press charges".

I also have to say that I strongly disagree with your statement that "a small woman can easily abuse a much larger man". A much larger man can just walk away, a small women can be grabbed and prevented from leaving. I honestly think that ideas like that, is what allows men to get away with physical and verbal abuse. All they have to do is make sure that woman strikes him in self defense and he can claim to be the victim. It is absurd to think that a small woman can abuse a much larger man.

I don't understand how anyone including yourself can defend or condone the police's actions in this!



[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 13, 2000).]

 

[bravomp]

Originally posted by bravomp:
Thanks for the response, even though it wasn't quite what I had expected. I've been reading about violence against women and found that it is not uncommon for the women not to want to press charges against the man. It seems to me that the police should have taken that into account.

You say she didn't dispute his claim, but the police didn't even tell her what he had said or that they were going to arrest her! They waited until he left and then proceeded to arrest her. They didn't talk to the neighbors who also heard him throwing my daughter around in the bedroom. Besides he told the police as he was leaving he didn't want to press charges, but then turned to my daughter and said "you better treat me right from now on or I will press charges".

I also have to say that I strongly disagree with your statement that "a small woman can easily abuse a much larger man". A much larger man can just walk away, a small women can be grabbed and prevented from leaving. I honestly think that ideas like that, is what allows men to get away with physical and verbal abuse. All they have to do is make sure that woman strikes him in self defense and he can claim to be the victim. It is absurd to think that a small woman can abuse a much larger man.

I don't understand how anyone including yourself can defend or condone the police's actions in this!






[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 12, 2000).]

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bravomp:
Thanks for the response, even though it wasn't quite what I had expected. I've been reading about violence against women and found that it is not uncommon for the women not to want to press charges against the man. It seems to me that the police should have taken that into account. You say she didn't dispute his claim, but the police didn't even tell her what he had said! They didn't talk to the neighbors who also heard him throwing my daughter around in the bedroom. Besides he told the police as he was leaving he didn't want to press charges, but then turned to my daughter and said "you better treat me right from now on or I will press charges".

I also have to say that I strongly disagree with your statement that "a small woman can easily abuse a much larger man". A much larger man can just walk away, a small women can be grabbed and prevented from leaving. I honestly think that ideas like that, is what allows men to get away with physical and verbal abuse. All they have to do is make sure that woman strikes him in self defense and he can claim to be the victim. It is absurd to think that a small woman can abuse a much larger man.

I don't understand how anyone including yourself can defend or condone the police's actions in this!


[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 12, 2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My response:

" . . . can defend or condone the police's actions in this!"

No one was condoning anything. The point of the response was that the law has now taken the choice AWAY from the police, and based upon what the police SEE, they must allow this matter to be heard in a court of law. The police can no longer make decisions of who's right or wrong like they used to be able.

The scenarios, as Tracey pointed out, are in fact possible. They may or may not have occurred in this particular instance, but again, it's not for the "beat cop" to decide any longer. The cops now have "standing orders" to arrest and let a judge decide the facts and truth of these types of situations.

You wanted the cops to make a judgment right there. They can't. The cop sees injury. The cop must make an arrest. Simple.

IAAL


------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."



[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited May 12, 2000).]

 

[PapaSmurf]

To Bravomp- The position you took on this, is exactly why so many men are falsely charged, not saying that this is the case here, but so many women use the "abuse excuse" just to punish the guy, with out considering the implications for all involved. Police I know would rather face almost any other situation, rather than being on scene of a DV call.
Sad Trivia- The worst day for reports of abuse reported by MEN? Feburary 14th- Broken bones, broken teeth, and "splatter bruises, caused by the gifts she got versus the gifts she expected. Second is CHRISTMAS, and then it gets fuzzy, due to birthdays being all over the calender. The Police did what they needed to, she needs to get away from the guy, (he wrote, with an uncanny ability to state the obvious).

 

[bravomp]

I see...poor abused men, never getting a fair deal, getting battered on Valentine's Day and Christmas just for bringing home the wrong gift. Wow, I never would have believed that so many people would side with clearly biased police and a violent jerk?!


IAAL's reasoning was that police make the arrest based on what they SEE. But give me a break, the police can SEE, what they want to SEE. When I picked my daughter up from the jail, I could SEE the marks on her neck and arms, I could SEE her swollen finger. Arresting based on what they SEE, is still making a subjective DECISION!! The mandatory arrest law only helps when the ABUSER is arrested!! My point is that the police need to be TRAINED and be sensitive to the situation and circumstances. The very least incompetent decision they could have made would have been to take them both to jail. The fact they let him leave with a bong in one hand and an open bottle of rum in the other clearly showed bias on the part of the police.

Regardless, what I wanted to know is what steps I could take to hold the police accountable for their incompetence. Based on the responses here, I don't have a snow ball's chance in hell to hold them accountable.

Forgetting about the money I put out to fight this, what really bothers me is that these knuckle headed cops could end up doing the same thing to other women who don't have the support and resources to fight this. At the mandatory pretrial conference, the D.A. offered her 6 months prison and 3 years probation. Listening to some of the responses here, I could see some women taking the plea and being haunted for the rest of their lives with a dometic violence conviction on their record. While the jerk who was the real perp, laughs his head off. The next time the jerk gets violent with her, do you think she will be anxious to call the police??!! Do you think he will care if she does??!! WOW...no wonder women don't report abuse!!

I am curious if the people who responded are attorneys. If so, I have alot less confidence in our legal system.



[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 13, 2000).]

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bravomp:
I see...poor abused men, never getting a fair deal, getting battered on Valentine's Day and Christmas just for bringing home the wrong gift. Wow, I never would have believed that so many people would side with clearly biased police and a violent jerk?!


IAAL's reasoning was that police make the arrest based on what they SEE. But give me a break, the police can SEE, what they want to SEE. When I picked my daughter up from the jail, I could SEE the marks on her neck and arms, I could SEE her swollen finger. Arresting based on what they SEE, is still making a subjective DECISION!! The mandatory arrest law only helps when the ABUSER is arrested!! My point is that the police need to be TRAINED and be sensitive to the situation and circumstances. The very least incompetent decision they could have made would have been to take them both to jail. The fact they let him leave with a bong in one hand and an open bottle of rum in the other clearly showed bias on the part of the police.

Regardless, what I wanted to know is what steps I could take to hold the police accountable for their incompetence. Based on the responses here, I don't have a snow ball's chance in hell to hold them accountable.

Forgetting about the money I put out to fight this, what really bothers me is that these knuckle headed cops could end up doing the same thing to some other women who doesn't have the support and resources to fight this. At the mandatory pretrial conference, the D.A. offered her 6 months prison and 3 years probation. Listening to some of the responses here, I could see some women taking the plea and being haunted for the rest of their lives with a dometic violence conviction on their record. While the jerk who was the real perp, laughs his head off. The next time the jerk gets violent with her, do you think she will be anxious to call the police??!! Do you think he will care if she does??!! WOW...no wonder women don't report abuse!!

I am curious if the people who responded are attorneys. If so, I have alot less confidence in our legal system.


[This message has been edited by bravomp (edited May 13, 2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

You know, we weren't there. I presume you weren't either. However, you told us a story, and we were only trying to help answer some questions you had, and perhaps, put some clarity in this situation for you. Apparently, we have failed, and for that, I certainly apologize. Perhaps you might take your cause up with the legislature of your State. You wrote to an Internet site to tell your story and get some opinions. We gave you our thoughts and opinions. You may not like or agree with them, but we gave them to you because that is why you wrote in the first place. You had to know that not everyone might see things the way you do, or agree with you. To you, we are faceless strangers who you see as uncaring. And, in the final analysis, and in that regard, you are absolutely correct - - we really don't care one way or the other - - and we shouldn't. Only a parent could really care about their child. We do not wish to argue with you; however, from your last post, it is also abundantly clear where your daughter gets her temper, which is probably a good place to look for the reason why she's in the predicament she finds herself.

IAAL


------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited May 13, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited May 13, 2000).]