Federal funding for arrests for DV

[dmcc10880]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
Just sayin'....

OVW Fiscal Year 2011
Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and
Enforcement of Protection Orders Program....

Statutory Program Purposes
By statute, funds under the Arrest Program may be used for the following purposes:
 Implement pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, including policies for protection order violations;

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
Just sayin'....

OVW Fiscal Year 2011
Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and
Enforcement of Protection Orders Program....

Statutory Program Purposes
By statute, funds under the Arrest Program may be used for the following purposes:
 Implement pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, including policies for protection order violations;

So? What does this have to do with all the incorrect information you've been spewing all over this forum?

 

[CdwJava]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
Just sayin'....

OVW Fiscal Year 2011
Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and
Enforcement of Protection Orders Program....

Statutory Program Purposes
By statute, funds under the Arrest Program may be used for the following purposes:
 Implement pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, including policies for protection order violations;

California (and most every other state) already have laws that mandate "pro arrest" policies, but do not mandate the arrest itself. You have still failed to show that any funding program pays per arrest. Read the details of the funding and learn a little about the grant process.

The one you reference is number two on this list:

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/docs/ovw-grant-program-factsheet.pdf

A full listing of funding opportunities (limited as they are) can be found here:

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/ovwgrantprograms.htm

Creating programs, re-writing policies (something not mandated by all states, but mandated in CA), paying for vertical prosecution, counselors, resources, etc., are not the same as paying per arrest.

Most agencies in my state and the others do not receive any funding from these sources. Zero. Nada. Zip.

EDIT: Oh, and did you even READ the text of the grant that you tacked onto the now closed thread?

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/docs/arrest-solicitation.pdf

About the OVW Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection
Orders Program

The Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders Program
(hereinafter referred to as the Arrest Program) recognizes that sexual assault, domestic
violence, dating violence, and stalking are crimes that require the criminal justice system to
hold offenders accountable for their actions through investigation, arrest, and prosecution of
violent offenders, and through close judicial scrutiny and management of offender behavior.

At each juncture in the criminal justice process, concerns for victim safety should guide the
actions of all partners in the system. Criminal justice agencies must collaborate among
themselves and in meaningful partnership with nonprofit, nongovernmental sexual assault and
domestic violence programs, including local shelters, rape crisis centers, victim service
organizations and sexual assault and domestic violence coalitions to ensure that victim safety is
a paramount consideration in the development of any strategy to address these crimes.
Additionally, representatives from criminal justice agencies working to prevent and reduce
sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking must have a clear
understanding of the roles of governmental and nongovernmental victim assistance programs.

This discretionary grant program is designed to encourage State, local, and Tribal governments
and State, local, and Tribal courts to treat sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence,
and stalking as serious violations of criminal law requiring the coordinated involvement of the
entire criminal justice system. The Arrest program challenges the entire community to listen,
communicate, identify problems, and share ideas that will result in new responses to ensure
victim safety and offender accountability. ​

Note that it does not pay for each booking. It pays to create policies and programs to make victims safer. And no prevention program would be complete without consideration of the arrest and prosecution of offenders. So, of course, arrest policy is a component of any such comprehensive program.

 

[dmcc10880]

California (and most every other state) already have laws that mandate "pro arrest" policies, but do not mandate the arrest itself. You have still failed to show that any funding program pays per arrest. Read the details of the funding and learn a little about the grant process.

The one you reference is number two on this list:

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/docs/ovw-grant-program-factsheet.pdf

A full listing of funding opportunities (limited as they are) can be found here:

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/ovwgrantprograms.htm

Creating programs, re-writing policies (something not mandated by all states, but mandated in CA), paying for vertical prosecution, counselors, resources, etc., are not the same as paying per arrest.

Most agencies in my state and the others do not receive any funding from these sources. Zero. Nada. Zip.

EDIT: Oh, and did you even READ the text of the grant that you tacked onto the now closed thread?

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/docs/arrest-solicitation.pdf

About the OVW Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection
Orders Program

The Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders Program
(hereinafter referred to as the Arrest Program) recognizes that sexual assault, domestic
violence, dating violence, and stalking are crimes that require the criminal justice system to
hold offenders accountable for their actions through investigation, arrest, and prosecution of
violent offenders, and through close judicial scrutiny and management of offender behavior.

At each juncture in the criminal justice process, concerns for victim safety should guide the
actions of all partners in the system. Criminal justice agencies must collaborate among
themselves and in meaningful partnership with nonprofit, nongovernmental sexual assault and
domestic violence programs, including local shelters, rape crisis centers, victim service
organizations and sexual assault and domestic violence coalitions to ensure that victim safety is
a paramount consideration in the development of any strategy to address these crimes.
Additionally, representatives from criminal justice agencies working to prevent and reduce
sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking must have a clear
understanding of the roles of governmental and nongovernmental victim assistance programs.

This discretionary grant program is designed to encourage State, local, and Tribal governments
and State, local, and Tribal courts to treat sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence,
and stalking as serious violations of criminal law requiring the coordinated involvement of the
entire criminal justice system. The Arrest program challenges the entire community to listen,
communicate, identify problems, and share ideas that will result in new responses to ensure
victim safety and offender accountability. ​

Note that it does not pay for each booking. It pays to create policies and programs to make victims safer. And no prevention program would be complete without consideration of the arrest and prosecution of offenders. So, of course, arrest policy is a component of any such comprehensive program.

What the heck is Pro arrest. I rest my case. Period.

Victim? Offender? Who is LE to make that decision?

Bottom line is the more you arrest, the more you collect. Period.

I do like that you now agree with me that there are federal funds available for arrests that you did not agree with previously.

Just another cop. Little education or minimum education. You get what you pay for I guess.

And yes, I paid for a booking fee even though the charges were dismissed.

What a scam put on by people much less educated than Bernie Madoff.

 

[dmcc10880]

So? What does this have to do with all the incorrect information you've been spewing all over this forum?

It totally supports my position. Totally correct information. Backed by fact, situs and so forth. If you can't deal with it, not my problem.

 

[CdwJava]

What the heck is Pro arrest. I rest my case. Period.

Pro arrest policies came about in an effort to protect victims from what was once seen as an abuse of discretion by law enforcement where arrests were typically NOT made in DV situations. In fact, the law until about 13 or 14 years ago in CA did not permit an arrest for a misdemeanor without a private person's arrest by the victim.

Pro arrest is not a mandatory arrest. We also tend to have pro arrest policies on DUI offenses, sexual offenses, etc. Most any offense where the suspect can continue to prey on a victim and where there exists probable cause to make the arrest.

Victim? Offender? Who is LE to make that decision?

Bottom line is the more you arrest, the more you collect. Period.

Not true at all. You have still failed to locate any grant that pays a bonus for each arrest. That's because there is not one.

I do like that you now agree with me that there are federal funds available for arrests that you did not agree with previously.

I have never denied that there are federal funds available for DV programs. You contended that arrests made LE money, and that just is not true.

Just another cop. Little education or minimum education. You get what you pay for I guess.

Really? So, you know my academic background? Guess you might be surprised.

And yes, I paid for a booking fee even though the charges were dismissed.

Okay.

What a scam put on by people much less educated than Bernie Madoff.

Funny ... I thought that the legislators that created these laws, the prosecutors that pursued these laws, and the judges that have upheld these laws had a great deal of education. Silly me.

 

[mistoffolees]

It totally supports my position. Totally correct information. Backed by fact, situs and so forth. If you can't deal with it, not my problem.

No it doesn't.

Even if one were to accept the premise that allocating financial resources to enable more arrests for DV somehow biases the system, it is a long way from supporting your claim that as soon as someone claims they were abused that someone will go to jail.

 

[CdwJava]

dmcc10880,

I am sorry you got a raw deal. But, your situation does not change the fact that the current state of affairs was created as a result of a historical lack of addressing what can be termed a "plague" of domestic violence that has sped through this country and continues to do so.

Pro arrest policies address historical inequities by removing much of the discretion by officers who might have tended to let things pass - and allow the violence to continue - by not acting at the time. By encouraging arrests when there is probable cause to make an arrest and a primary aggressor can be identified, it can give a much needed cooling off period and provide the victim an opportunity to get assistance. Where the law sometimes falls short is that even with these laws, the victims tend to recant quickly and are often working to bail out their abuser hours after the arrest. In fact, many victims (more than three quarters) will recant or decline to assist the prosecution within 48 hours and more will do so before trial. Even with pro-arrest policies, the control abusers often have over their victims is still strong and programs are being developed and implemented to try and address this particular relationship dynamic.

I am sorry you got a raw deal. Truly, I am. But, these laws and supporting programs have been designed in the attempt to protect the victim and the family. Programs are in place that show great promise in addressing the long term issues involved with DV, but there is always work that can be done. And this work cannot happen without additional funding for comprehensive programs that involve partnerships between law enforcement, the court system, and social services. These programs take money - money which is in short supply these days.

Maybe one day we will have the perfect criminal justice system. For now, we have to settle with one that is merely quite good, but not perfect.

 

[dmcc10880]

dmcc10880,

I am sorry you got a raw deal. But, your situation does not change the fact that the current state of affairs was created as a result of a historical lack of addressing what can be termed a "plague" of domestic violence that has sped through this country and continues to do so.

Pro arrest policies address historical inequities by removing much of the discretion by officers who might have tended to let things pass - and allow the violence to continue - by not acting at the time. By encouraging arrests when there is probable cause to make an arrest and a primary aggressor can be identified, it can give a much needed cooling off period and provide the victim an opportunity to get assistance. Where the law sometimes falls short is that even with these laws, the victims tend to recant quickly and are often working to bail out their abuser hours after the arrest. In fact, many victims (more than three quarters) will recant or decline to assist the prosecution within 48 hours and more will do so before trial. Even with pro-arrest policies, the control abusers often have over their victims is still strong and programs are being developed and implemented to try and address this particular relationship dynamic.

I am sorry you got a raw deal. Truly, I am. But, these laws and supporting programs have been designed in the attempt to protect the victim and the family. Programs are in place that show great promise in addressing the long term issues involved with DV, but there is always work that can be done. And this work cannot happen without additional funding for comprehensive programs that involve partnerships between law enforcement, the court system, and social services. These programs take money - money which is in short supply these days.

Maybe one day we will have the perfect criminal justice system. For now, we have to settle with one that is merely quite good, but not perfect.

Carl, first, my apologies to you- a stranger on an internet forum for some of my crass comments- not all though.

I do have to take issue though with your thoughts that arrests do not bring in additional funding. Compliance with the program means arrests and money. Noncompliance with the program takes away funding. It's really fundamental.

My angst is the rush to judgment in the system. From the LEO who makes the arrest to the prosecutor who believes EVERYONE is guilty and the Nancy Graces and Jane Velez Mitchells to the Vinnie Palitans or any of the talking head lawyers on TV who immediately believe every defendant is guilty.

It's just not the high profile cases, but the everyday cases in every criminal court and the state has the resources to pin the defendant against the wall- especially if represented by a PD. The only way to get through the system is if you're fortunate to have the ability to pay for a good defense attorney. That's a shame.

 

[mistoffolees]

I do have to take issue though with your thoughts that arrests do not bring in additional funding. Compliance with the program means arrests and money. Noncompliance with the program takes away funding. It's really fundamental.

EVEN IF THAT WERE TRUE, how does that translate into 'proving' your statement that every time someone says 'he hit me', that someone will spend time in jail?

 

[single317dad]

I've stayed out of this argument so far, because I don't particularly like confrontation, and I've had quite a bit of it in my short time on this forum. However, I feel the need to add something to the conversation.

First, don't mistake any of what I say for agreement that there is a "bounty" on DV arrests. I don't believe that any more than I believe you're more likely to get a speeding ticket on the 30th of the month so the officer can make his "quota."

However, there are laws in place, differing from state to state, that either mandate or strongly encourage arrest in DV situations, even with a complete lack of evidence aside from the "victim" stating there was an attack.

Mandatory arrest for domestic violence doesn’t work – even Harvard says so 8/10/07 | Fathers' Rights, Child Support, Custody

That site lists some of the states that mandate arrest on a DV call (22 states), and some that encourage it (8, including California.) I can say for sure that Indiana is missing from the "mandated" list, and probably more are as well.

To OP: I feel for you as well. I've BTDT regarding fighting false DV charges and a mandatory arrest and TRO (more than once). However, your emotion is clouding your argument. Like a lot of the "fathers rights" groups, you lose credibility with blanket statements and outlandish claims. Back everything up with evidence, and maybe we can change some minds (and some laws.) Good luck to you.

 

[dmcc10880]

EVEN IF THAT WERE TRUE, how does that translate into 'proving' your statement that every time someone says 'he hit me', that someone will spend time in jail?

Let me ask you, what happens when someone is arrested? Where do they go? The Four Seasons? The Ritz Carlton? The Holiday Inn Express?

 

[dmcc10880]

I've stayed out of this argument so far, because I don't particularly like confrontation, and I've had quite a bit of it in my short time on this forum. However, I feel the need to add something to the conversation.

First, don't mistake any of what I say for agreement that there is a "bounty" on DV arrests. I don't believe that any more than I believe you're more likely to get a speeding ticket on the 30th of the month so the officer can make his "quota."

However, there are laws in place, differing from state to state, that either mandate or strongly encourage arrest in DV situations, even with a complete lack of evidence aside from the "victim" stating there was an attack.

Mandatory arrest for domestic violence doesn’t work – even Harvard says so 8/10/07 | Fathers' Rights, Child Support, Custody

That site lists some of the states that mandate arrest on a DV call (22 states), and some that encourage it (8, including California.) I can say for sure that Indiana is missing from the "mandated" list, and probably more are as well.

To OP: I feel for you as well. I've BTDT regarding fighting false DV charges and a mandatory arrest and TRO (more than once). However, your emotion is clouding your argument. Like a lot of the "fathers rights" groups, you lose credibility with blanket statements and outlandish claims. Back everything up with evidence, and maybe we can change some minds (and some laws.) Good luck to you.

Very interesting link.

 

[stealth2]

CDW - you're spinning your wheels. This dude isn't interested in what you have to say - he has his own agenda. So may as well ignore him.

 

[mistoffolees]

Let me ask you, what happens when someone is arrested? Where do they go? The Four Seasons? The Ritz Carlton? The Holiday Inn Express?

Since CA is not one of the states with mandatory arrests, they don't necessarily go anywhere. You were wrong.