Hot Dog, It’s Healin’ Time

By Heidi Hiatt

We all wear masks, and the time comes when we cannot remove them
without removing some of our own skin. -André Berthiaume

Martha Stout, author of The Sociopath Next Door, said, “The most universal behavior of unscrupulous people is not directed, as one might imagine, at our fearfulness. It is, perversely, an appeal to our sympathy.”

I find it very disturbing when people fall for this mind game, a trap that low to no conscience types and their defenders instinctively set when cornered. Finding themselves in the hot seat, they divert onlookers’ attention from their misdeeds to all other possible causes of their behavior, including how society, their parents, their education, and their uncle’s former college roommate’s cousin’s deranged hedge trimmer-wielding hamster all have responsibility for their “mistakes”. Heaven forbid they should have to take responsibility for their own choices.

When Congressmen Anthony Weiner’s resignation speech was broadcast live on the radio this week, I couldn’t help but slip into psychology mode and analyze the content. The speech began with a recap of “what the people wanted” and how he became a Congressman because of their will. It came across as “remember, happy campers, you want me. Resignation isn’t what you want. Everything I do, I do it for you.”

Then, as he spoke over hecklers who exhibited the maturity of a seventh grade locker room, he embarked on a progression of pseudo-apologies that peaked with a statement I found curiously similar to the “apologies” serial killers give in court. The congressman said something to the effect of, “most importantly, I need to take time out for myself, so I can heal.”

Um… dude. Really? That’s all you’ve got? That’s the pinnacle of a weird attempt at remorse? Where’s the apology for lying, or to any victims, or to your wife, or…? You’re the most important person, the most harmed individual in this? Wow. That’s pathetic. Sounds like the greatest love… of all… was happening to you… (Whitney Houston voice). It’s clear that he was looking out for number one.

I really didn’t care about what Congressman Weiner was doing until I heard a teenager might be involved and then learned he lied about it. Sometimes we just have to admit we’re wrong and do better. According to his initial public statements, though, it sounded like those tighty whities photos just magically teleported themselves to the cell phones of random female fans. It was one of those “I’m sorry, do you think your 300 million fellow Americans are stupid?” moments.

Weiner’s attempted Jedi mind tricks were hopelessly ineffective and transparent. I don’t know enough about him to speculate about his inner condition, but can say that his recent laments sound narcissistic. Many saw through the spins being put on his ethical logjam, but I’m concerned that a case much closer to home is not being seen as objectively.

Yesterday serial burglar, thief, vandal, firearms law violator, fire starter, et cetera Colton Harris-Moore pled guilty to a handful of charges in federal court. He will be sentenced October 28th. The media is reporting that he may serve up to 6½ years in prison, and that he has to “forfeit” or “give up” the profits that will result from his exploits (movie deal, books, and so on). One news site reported that Harris-Moore and his attorneys had a hearty chuckle when the federal prosecutor forgot to mention the theft of a TV dinner (oh, pssht, no biggie even though he had to break into someone’s house to get it, right?).

Note the terminology being used widely in the Seattle area media: he is going to “forfeit” the profits. He has to “give up” the money he could otherwise be making off of his crime spree. This “forfeiting” means he is paying “restitution” to the victims. His attorney says there will be enough money to “pay back” the people he terrorized and stole from (keeping in mind his crimes went far beyond the million dollar mark).

Just as I said, “huh?” as Anthony Weiner “apologized,” now I’m saying, “this is restitution?” How do you “give up” something you don’t have? If you’re “forfeiting” profits, doesn’t that imply that you are foregoing the acquisition or retention of money that belongs to you? I realize that without this stipulation, Harris-Moore could keep the money he’s made off of the victimization of other human beings.

My point is that he’s not earning it, or working for it, or making an effort to pay the victims back himself. He’s “paying them back” by taking advantage of them in the first place. While I applaud the U.S. Attorney’s office for ensuring that this condition be part of the plea deal, it should not be labeled true restitution. Restitution would be breaking rocks in the hot sun, since he fought the law, and the law won. In other words, he should have to do something other than sit back and let the money roll in.

This reminded me of when Harris-Moore “gave” the animal shelter in Raymond $100 while on the lam. Fans cheered his thoughtful act of charity, but others of us thought it unlikely that he had $100 to give; he was probably donating stolen money. At the time I said I hoped his fans would inundate animal shelters with money if they were so happy about it (it would be nice to see some genuine good come out of the followers’ frenzy).

Another strange and murky aspect of the Harris-Moore case that lingers like the stench of a refried beans eating contest in an airtight tour bus is the optimism over his upcoming “rehabilitation.” I don’t know if any psychological evaluations have been conducted since he’s been in custody or who has conducted them. Even if there has been an appropriate assessment of his internal state, the public may not be privy to it (though they should be).

Douglas Adams once said that the most misleading assumptions we make are the ones we don’t even know we’re making, and there is a widespread assumption that because of Harris-Moore’s age and intelligence, he will be rehabilitated. I want to post a billboard-sized neon caution sign with flashing red lights on it right here: we don’t know that. We should not assume that. From what we know through the media’s coverage of Harris-Moore’s crimes, even without seeing the official police and prosecutor’s reports, there is evidence of an almost lifelong pattern of antisocial behavior that’s escalated over time.

People with low to no empathy and remorse, in many cases, are not rehabilitated. Some experts will argue that they can’t be or that the only way to effect any change is to have them engage in a cost-benefit analysis of how their behavior affects themselves. When they are finally convicted of a criminal offense (many are not), they spend their time in prison studying, networking, researching, and impressing everyone with their “model prisoner” status. The parole boards love them and some only serve part of their sentence.

This is how swindlers, rapists, murderers, burglars, and other convicts weasel their way out from behind bars to return to their hunting grounds and strike again. Similar to how some who perpetrate domestic violence get to go to “treatment” to hone their abusing skills, then come out of treatment more deceptive and stealthy than ever, some antisocials, sociopaths, and psychopaths leave prison as “success stories” when in actuality they’re better equipped than ever to victimize others.

Harris-Moore has so many fans, and such an emphasis has been placed on the terrible circumstances of his childhood, youth, and intellect, that some people think he’s going to turn it all around and use his “superpowers” for good. I would remind them that for every Superman, there’s a Lex Luthor. Some use their gifts selflessly, some selfishly.

It is rare that someone entrenched in the wasteland of vanity and megalomania sheds their scales for a cloak of righteousness. They can appear to; those are the scariest kind of people, the ones who appear charitable and moral while pillaging the lives of others for their own ends. As the Good Book says, Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

Do I want Harris-Moore to spend his time in prison productively and become a better person? Of course; that’s what we hope incarceration does for people. I can’t limit God’s grace or be certain of the outcome of this mess. Through the lens of forensic psychology, however, I see a lot of red flags that indicate a low potential for genuine change and a number of reasons to be concerned about this guy’s future impact on society.

When people say, “he hasn’t killed anyone,” I want to sit them down and point out that this is how such criminals develop. Besides that, he could have already killed someone—he started a fire in a home in front of a small child, may have fired at police officers, illegally flew planes he didn’t know how to land, and broke into homes.

He also stole an assault rifle from a deputy’s car, was frequently armed, and even fired a gun when apprehended. He seemed paranoid, telling witnesses before his arrest, “they’re going to kill me.” Let’s not forget the time he bailed out of his neighbor’s stolen Mercedes after aiming it towards a large propane tank when deputies were pursuing him.

That childhood people are quick to use as an excuse for his behavior is the same set of circumstances that research is now showing to be a huge contributing factor to antisocial behavior and psychopathy. Some researchers theorize that child neglect or abuse could actually be the “on” switch that activates the sociopathic personality (with the caveat that many sociopaths also have normal childhoods).

Personally I believe that no matter what biological, environmental, or other factors you’re dealing with, you still have a choice as to how you treat others. It is interesting, once you start delving into the excuses people make for someone else’s behavior, how the very factors they believe should exonerate the subject may be the exact things that make them so dangerous.

Logically, the more we believe that elements other than a suspect’s free will influence their victimization of others, the more we should be trying to protect society from them. If they’re not in the driver’s seat, then we need to keep them off of the road and stop sending them back for remedial driver’s ed.

Harris-Moore has yet to face the courts in Island and San Juan County. He may well be sentenced to more time, yet I won’t be surprised if he’s allowed to serve his sentences concurrently. I hope not; he is a danger to society and needs to be punished for his flamboyant, repetitive patterns of evil behavior. While I can’t diagnose him from a distance, I want to be on record as warning the public that all that glitters is not gold, and that “forfeiting” profits from crime is not an indicator of real remorse.

Pleading guilty yesterday was in his best interest. It avoids the risks and costs of a federal trial and he knew he had to pay the piper at least a little. I’m bothered that he probably won’t spend more than a few years in prison (6½? I’d be shocked) and that his mother can still profit from the domestic terrorism spree she helped fuel. I hope that Randy Gaylord and Greg Banks, for the sake of the public they serve, are not merciful and prosecute Harris-Moore to the fullest extent of the law.

Additionally, I want to address the significant number of people who call speaking out against Harris-Moore’s behavior “hatred.” I saw this accusation of “hating” resurface on newspaper discussion boards yesterday. Condemning criminal, dangerous, selfish, and/or antisocial behavior is not hating someone. It is hating the behavior. There is a big difference.

There are people in my life I love, but I abhor the sick and abusive things they do to others. I can hope and pray for the best for them, but I can also keep my distance and do what I can to stop their selfish behavior. My faith does not compel me to tolerate it or accommodate it. If anything, I’m called to stand up for myself and for the victims. That’s what our criminal justice system is supposed to do as well.

Returning to my rant on the self-absorbed woman in the grocery store last night, we have to stop excusing and allowing bad behavior. I can’t join the quasi-religious mysticism of the Colton Harris-Moore cult or think of him as Camano’s own Bart Simpson, just an impish cartoon character who commits endearing acts of comical mischief. No, he’s an adult who has exhibited some strange impulses and hazardous decision making. While an attitude of contrition lingers in the air, I see a smokescreen. Time will tell.

Just as recent presidents have trumpeted the infringement of civil liberties and beefing up of an inefficient government as “for the benefit of the American people,” certain people caught in lies in the news this week may be squirting the same ink. Don’t believe everything they say.

Dig deeper. Look for the spins. Analyze the words and phrases that are being used repeatedly. Think things through for yourself, and don’t let other people make up your mind for you. Ask the ancient Roman question, “qui bono?”—who benefits?

‘Cause hey, buddy, this is about you. You’re the American people. This is what works best for everyone. You wanted this, remember? This is fair. It’s all working out like it’s supposed to. The dishonest among us just need time to go heal themselves. They’re the real victims here. Just give them time, and it’ll all be okay. Right?

Right?

Heidi Hiatt is a Generation X woman who is proud to advocate for crime victims, including domestic violence survivors, people with food allergies, children’s issues, animals, personal privacy rights, government accountability, and ethical law enforcement practices. Read her blog:Truth, Justice, and All-American Allergen-Free Apple Pie Straight Talk in a Crooked World

Odd Circumstances Surround Jail “Suicide”

By Dennis Griffin

On February 23 1990, the Paulsboro, New Jersey police department received an anonymous phone call reporting an incident of domestic violence at 1546 South Delaware Street, the residence of 25-year-old Gerald “Jerry” Kearney and his family. When police arrived there was an argument going on between Jerry and his wife Chyrll. Although she begged the police not to arrest him, four officers removed him from the home and took him to jail. Shortly after being placed in his cell, Jerry allegedly used his T-shirt to hang himself.

Jerry grew up in a dysfunctional home and suffered abuse at the hands of his father. He and Chyrll were married on June 9, 1984. At the time of his death the couple had three children, and Chyrll was pregnant with their fourth. Jerry was excited about the pregnancy and had just received invoices and business cards for his new landscaping business.

According to his sister Kathleen Kearney, Jerry was a good, caring man who loved his family very much. But he was by no means an angel, having had numerous run-ins with the law, mainly for theft.

On the night of his death, Jerry called Kathleen and asked her to come over and babysit so he and his wife could go out. When she arrived about an hour later, she noticed tiny droplets of blood on the steps leading to the front door, and learned that Jerry had already been arrested and taken to jail.

A short time later, a police sergeant who had been one of the arresting officers came to the door. He told Kathleen and Chyrll that Jerry had an outstanding warrant for a $25 traffic ticket. Kathleen explained that all of Jerry’s warrants had been taken care of in January, when her parents put their house up as collateral to bail him out of jail. The officer said he would go back to the station and check further. Twenty minutes later he came back and said Jerry would be released as soon as the paperwork was done. Kathleen had been right, there were no outstanding warrants and they were not going to charge him in the domestic incident.

After a brief time passed the sergeant was back again. This time he was accompanied by an assistant prosecutor. They said that Jerry had hanged himself in his cell and was dead.

When Jerry was pronounced DOA at the hospital, the attending physician refused to sign the death certificate. When Jerry’s parents got to the hospital to identify his body, they were denied access. A priest, who had been called to administer last rights, was also denied access to the body.

Paulsboro is located in Gloucester County. However, the medical examiner, Dr. Claus Speth, was attending a convention in Ohio at the time and the medical examiner from Burlington County should have received the body. But for unknown reasons, the police chief placed a call to Dr. Speth and asked him to return and do Jerry’s autopsy as a personal favor. The next day Dr. Speth performed the autopsy. Afterward, he called Jerry’s parents and told them he believed Jerry had been murdered. He said he’d make a final decision after conferring with the police.

Although Jerry’s family doesn’t know for sure what happened at that meeting, they have heard that the session was recorded on an audio tape. Allegedly, one of the arresting officers stated that he’d slammed Jerry’s face into the concrete walkway. However, whatever his reasons, Dr. Speth ruled the death a suicide.

The official reports state that Jerry fell down the steps. But some witnesses say that Jerry was screaming “I’m not resisting, I’m going peacefully,” as officers dragged him down the steps by his feet, with his head bouncing off the concrete steps.

Some witnesses say they saw Jerry unconscious or possibly lifeless at the bottom of the steps. Kathleen states that the autopsy showed Jerry had two black eyes, a split lip, multiple bruises, neck injuries not consistent with a hanging, and his voice box and thyroid glands were hemorrhaged.

According to Kathleen, one of the involved officers had been fired from other police agencies for incidents involving brutality and his records were sealed after each firing. This is the same officer who allegedly told Dr. Speth that he slammed Jerry’s head into the walkway.

Of further concern to Jerry’s family, the police told them that the T-shirt Jerry used to hang himself was lost and unavailable for examination. In addition, the authorities claim the security cameras in the facility were not operational at the time of the incident.

Was Jerry Kearney’s death suicide or homicide? The family may never know for sure. 

For discussion about this case, and others where there has not been a satisfactory resolution, please visit the Crime Wire Website Forum.

Dennis Griffin is a nationally known true crime author and part of the Crime Wire Team.

www.dennisngriffin.com

Out of the Darkness: Live in the Light

By Neil Schori

Why do we return to the very things that can harm us so badly?  Alcoholics return to the bottle many years after promising to leave it alone.  We eat well for a time and then fall off the wagon and go back to our overly-indulgent ways.  Each day people are diagnosed with lung cancer, but they refuse to stop smoking the cigarettes that will end up hastening the end of their lives.  It makes no sense, does it?  But we all lured back into the darkness, aren't we?

In the Bible, the Apostle Paul says it like this in the book of Ephesians 5:8~

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light...The Apostle Paul knew something about human nature.  He knew that we need to be reminded to live in the light, because for many different reasons, we tend to walk back into darkness of all varieties.  Why is that?  Why do we return to things and people and relationships that can hurt us so deeply?

My daughter, Ava, broke her arm very severely a little bit over a year ago.  It was such a bad break that it required surgery from one of the most recommended surgeons in the Chicago-land area.  Unfortunately, his schedule was full, and we had to delay her surgery for two weeks.  Ava, my effervescent two year old had to try to live life with her arm in a splint.  Finally the surgery happened and afterward, Ava's arm was put in a cast for three whole weeks.

We planned a celebration at the end of the three weeks, and called it "Ava's Cast-Off Party," and invited all of her neighborhood friends.  We were ready to party...and so was everyone.  Except for Ava.  Our little girl had become so familiar with having a cast, that she still just wanted to use her other arm.  She also had become so scared of the pain, that she was oblivious to the fact that her cast was now gone and she was as able as she ever was before.

Fear and familiarity do that, don't they?  That's why we stay in unhealthy relationships because we don't know how to live free, and the familiar seems so much easier to "do," even when it very well may kill us.  Here's what you have to realize: if you are being abused, you must break free from the fear and familiarity of your abuser.  Tell your story to trusted friends.  Refuse to be silent.  When you break your silence, he will start to lose his control over you.  And suddenly, you'll start to see that living in the light is a wonderful thing.  You were meant for it.

If you need help, I'm here.  I will help you find your way back to the light.

Peace,


Neil


Neil Schori is pastor of Naperville Christian Church.  Visit his website www.neilschori.com

Behind The Four Walls

By Gaetane Borders

In recent months, many African American leaders and celebrities have urged the community to help make a positive impact in the lives of our youth…particularly our young Black men. I have listened intently to radio and tv shows in which experts discussed the presumed reasons for why so many of our young adults are ”out of control” and demonstrating such a “lack respect for authority.” Drugs, gangs, rap music, and negative media imagery have all had a finger pointed at them as a probable cause. Yet, there is also another poignant issue which has a profound affect on our youth that is not often discussed. That issue is domestic violence. Although alarmingly frequent…the topic is almost completely avoided in common conversations.

Several months ago, the world learned of a horrific crime in which 41-year-old Patrick Dell shot and murdered his estranged wife, Natasha Whyte-Dell, and four step-children. Another step-son was severely injured, but was expected to live. Reports indicated that on December 20, Whyte-Dell said her estranged husband came after her with a knife, slashed her tires and scratched an "X'' into the concrete driveway. He apparently also threatened her by saying "You will be going to the morgue," according to a police report. "Your family is going to cry today," he said in rage. Despite reportedly fearing for her life, Whyte-Dell repeatedly reconciled with her husband in hopes that he would change. Sadly….he never did.

Tragic as it is, Natasha’s story is not exceptional. Reports have shown that the number one killer of African American females, ages 15 to 34, is homicide at the hands of an intimate partner or ex-partner. In fact, the African American community reportedly experiences domestic violence at greater levels than White Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos according to various research studies. In addition, an estimated 63% of all males between ages 11 and 20 who are serving time for homicide in the U.S. are incarcerated because they killed their mothers’ abusers? Here’s yet another statistic… children are present 25% of the time when their mothers are murdered by their partners.

I urge everyone to promise not to turn a blind eye to this issue anymore…starting today. This includes community leaders as well as celebrities. If we begin to talk about it openly, we can build and support a community culture that stands against violence in our homes. This generation is watching us, and will suffer from both our actions and inactions. Therefore, if we really want to see our Black youth achieve academic, emotional, and economic success, we must not only be committed to addressing the violence in the streets…we also have to remedy the violence occurring in our homes.

Gaétane F. Borders, Ed.S.
Certified School Psychologist
President of Peas In Their Pods and author of www.theparentingpundit.com

I will never do that again!

By Jillian Maas Backman

How many of you know someone involved in an abusive and unhealthy relationship? In time, through grace and fate have been able to walk away and pronounce to the world “I will never do that again.” As soon as they make this proclamation find themselves repeating the same ole behavior as before.

I believe people when they say they never want to repeat worn out habits of picking the wrong man or woman to get involved with again. I believe their intentions are pure. So, what causes so many to seek out self- destructive relationships even when they intellectually understand it is not for their highest good? There is a missing link that binds truthful intentions with an honest reality check that seems to be overlook, the bond of energy.

When we are intimately involved with any other human beings an invisible connection occurs automatically. Without much effort, we exchange energetic pieces of ourselves to feel close to one another. There are a thousand ways this happens, sharing secrets, innermost dreams for ourselves, and even working through common struggles together. Every significant exchange is filled with active energy. These energy nuggets are made up of all positive and negative human feelings and emotions. Over time, these millions of energy transformations build an in-movable energy structure between both parties. This quiet exchange of connections go un-noticed by the outside world, but felt in the deepest crevices of all human souls. In fact, no one pays any attention to this formation UNTIL it is disturbed by outside influence. Mainly, pulled apart by human force or death in relationships.

These structures are constructed on either a balanced healthy positive energy or an unbalanced unhealthy negative energy foundation. The outcome hinges strictly upon how you treat each other during the relationship. If you are involved in a mutual exchange of respect and love the energy configuration looks like this:

Each person is encircled within their own energy of respect and love for themselves. When two people of this type come together to form a relationship it is not necessary to surrender personal energetic power or have the need to control another. Their collective positive energetic exchange builds up and creates its own freestanding energy relationship structure onto itself as reflected by the sphere located in the center.

Figure 2. A Healthy Full Bodied Energetic Relationship

The second diagram demonstrates how one can create healthy relationships without giving pieces of your energetic self away. Through the act of honoring and trust the bond will strengthen over time. Open communication, in both listening and responding in a mutual loving environment and fulfilling the needs of each partner in the most positive manner keeps the energy in- tact and raises the probabilities for long-term success. If this relationship would happen to separate at some point in time, neither partner would suffer because they were able to maintain their individuality in all aspects of life. This is a crucial element in seeking new relationships. There are not any negative pieces stolen or left behind from either person. This kind of energetically balanced aware person does not have an intrinsic need to fill an energy void to feel completely. They are quite content and happy in and out of significant relationships of all kinds.

Figure 3. An Unbalanced Energetically Negative Relationship

This diagram demonstrates what happens to the energy of a person entering into an unbalanced energetically negative relationship. Relationships of this nature are much like an energetic puzzle. The incomplete person is always on the search for the one to complete their misaligned energy puzzle pieces. As you can imagine this kind of hide-and-seek game creates a frustrating tension between two people. A square peg never fits in a round hole, and trying to force it creates that friction described previously. Unforunately, this kind of relationships have a very short life cycle under any circumstances.

Take both examples from above and apply the descriptions to your past and present significant relationships. This will give insights to the “whys” some people seem to have a re-occurring theme of seeking out and collecting like-minded incomplete energetic compatible people. Each person is attempting to energetically fill in the missing pieces to complete their energetic whole.

For the next thirty days take an internal intuitive sensing quiz to glean valuable insights that can help you determine what energy you are putting out into the world and what you are bringing back into your relationships.

1) Which diagram best reflects how you think others perceive your energetic field?

2) Begin to evaluate others in your inner circle of relationships. See if you can sense what their energic field feels like to you.

3) Do you consider these connections energetically positive and healthy OR negative and incomplete unhealthy relationships.

4) Tally all of your results together. Do you have more positive or negative connections in your life?

For the moment, simply stay reflective with your findings. I want you to become aware of what you are putting out in the world for others to invisibly pick-up on. It is important that you stay very neutral with your results. This exercise is not meant to punish you for past choices; it is simply a way of gauging how you want to proceed in the future with your new relationships. In my next blog post I am going to share thoughts and exercises designed to break the cycle you may find yourself in and strengthen the ones that are working. Good luck and be honest, no one will ever know except YOU. Knowledge of knowing more about you is always a positive attribute to obtain.

Love living in my own learning curve of life.

Jillian Maas Backman

Homeschool or Public High School for Courtney Alexis Stodden? (Minor bride of Doug Hutchison)

By Anny Jacoby

Star Jones tweeted the following, "sexual deviance is not a "preference". I "prefer" to live in Buckingham Palace...but if I go there uninvited...they will arrest me."

Ok, ok, let me catch you up in case you haven't heard...Doug Anthony Hutchison, the Lost actor, 51 and minor teen, Courtney Alexis Stodden, age 16 has caused quite a stir in the media as they revealed that they were married in May in Las Vegas. I can just imagine the look on your face and what you are thinking at this moment - my head actually hurts from shaking it from side to side.

The first question that is raised is..."is this legal?" According to the marriage license page for Clark County, Las Vegas, it's easy. Minor applicants who are 16 or 17 years old can obtain a marriage license with two things: an original or certified copy of their birth certificate, and a parent or legal guardian who will provide his or her consent. Answer: Yes.

Minor Courtney's mom, Krista Stodden, approved of her daughter's marriage despite the 35-year age difference and that at least one of Courtney's parents did sign the necessary permission form. Mr. and Mrs. Stodden seem to adore Hutchison and that they are both supportive of the marriage.

So many things come to mind with this relationship/marriage; I honestly do not know where to begin. What compelled Hutchison to marry a "child"/minor or even have an interest in any way?

Doug Anthony Hutchison -
Hutchison was born May 26, 1960 (51 years old this year), known for his roles in The Green Mile, The X-Files, Lost and 24. He owns the production company, Dark Water, Inc. Hutchison's first marriage lasted two years and is now married to minor, Courtney Stodden.

Courtney Alexis Stodden -
When Stodden was born Toy Story was all the rage in theaters, Bill Clinton was busy achieving a budget surplus, and Crystal Pepsi had just been taken off the shelves.

Star Jones hit the target as it is apparent that Hutchison definitely has sexual desires and behaviors considered to be unusual or abnormal, i.e. sexual preference is a child. And, the majority of individuals with a sexual deviation (if caught) would be in trouble with the law. A sixteen year-old teenager does not have the insight nor maturity to make a rational decision to marry nor to be seriously involved to this degree. The honeymoon phase will dissipate and then what?

As a parent, I am appalled that her parents would condone their daughter's wishes, behavior and actually give her permission to marry or even consider dating this man. Hutchison is older than her father! The majority of parents who would do this (if caught) would be slammed with human trafficking charges. Think about it. Does anyone else see $$$$$$$$$$ in this arrangement?

It's surprising that Courtney was required to produce her birth certificate and permission form (reminds me of field trip requirements for kids) - the majority of people are feeling that she is older than 16 by her appearance. The Officiator was on his/her toes with this ceremony.

A further note of consideration - Nevada lawmakers really need to re-think, add and move to the top of their agenda to abolish this existing law that is in place that allows minors 16 and 17 years old to wed in their state. What does it truly say about the moral's of the lawmakers of Nevada? I know, I know....if there's a will, there's a way but this is truly allowing child sexual abuse to exist without any ramifications - no law to protect these kids. And, neither kids, parents or ephebophile's (the sexual preference of adults for mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19; in sexual ethics it may be defined as a sexual preference for girls generally 14-16 years old and boys 14-19 years old.) need additional encouragement or avenues to assist in their deviant ways.

And, will Courtney be homeschooled or will she attend a high school near Hutchinson's home? Or will she eventually get her GED? She is a child, perhaps outwardly mature for her age but she is only 16.....only of legal age to get a driver's license.

Are you feeling the mix of everything that smells soooooooooo wrong in ALL ways?

Many feel that this marriage was truly for promotional purposes only and they are certainly getting the attention. For how long, only time will tell. You can listen to Courtney's music on her website - you decide. It is understood that Courtney is a client of Hutchison's production company, Dark Water, Inc. where she is attempting to promote a CD.

Personally, I don't care for her music nor am I fan of Hutchison but I do care about the message that is being sent to other "kids" who may listen to her music and become fans. I am hoping that parents are tuning into their "kids" and at least are in the same chapter. Not always are we on the same page with our "kids". It's imperative to at least be in sync with them.

Take care and STAY SAFE!

Personal Safety Expert and Child Abuse Prevention Specialist
Anny is the President of The Realistic Female Self-Defense Company and Project Safe Girls

Anny received her PDR (Personal Defense Readiness) Instructor Certification in 2008. Anny is also a Child Abuse Authorized Facilitator and Prevention Specialist who trains adults to prevent, recognize and react responsibility to child sexual abuse through Darkness to Light's Stewards of Children certification program.

Why Don’t We End Domestic Violence?

By Barry Goldstein

Society has the knowledge and ability to prevent a large majority of domestic violence crimes and especially murders. It is not like cancer or heart disease which would require some fundamental changes in human behavior to achieve massive reductions. We could easily put together a change in laws, policies and practices and quickly end the danger of domestic violence for most women and children. If we could as readily prevent most of the deaths from earthquakes, tornados, cancer or terror attacks, we would not hesitate to do so. Why should we continue to tolerate the enormous harm caused by abusers? Many of our leaders have spoken of and dreamed of a world without domestic violence. This is a worthy goal, but I am not naïve enough to believe we can end all domestic violence in our lifetimes. We can, however create a massive reduction in domestic violence crimes. I say let’s do it.

Background

Our publisher asked Mo Hannah and I to prepare a second volume of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. I decided to write a chapter for the book of a modern tale of two cities comparing Quincy, Massachusetts with Poughkeepsie, New York. I selected Quincy, Massachusetts because they had developed the Quincy Model which had resulted in a drastic reduction of domestic violence homicide. I selected Poughkeepsie, New York because they had been severely criticized for using approaches in custody court that strongly favored abusive fathers. The court system and particularly the judges reacted to the criticism in a defensive and retaliatory manner. Dutchess County has now had a series of domestic violence homicides including the last crime in which the abusive father also killed a police officer. The County Legislature created a committee to study and respond to the series of domestic violence homicides and I am interested to see if they make a connection between the murders and the pattern of mistreatment of protective mothers in the custody court system.

In the late 1970s around the start of the modern movement to end domestic violence, approximately three thousand domestic violence homicides were committed each year in the United States. The frequency of domestic violence homicides did not change significantly until society adopted policies and practices to hold abusers accountable, particularly with pro-arrest policies. The timing of the increased accountability with the reduction in domestic violence homicide supported the belief that these policies led to the reduction, but perhaps what was most convincing was the results in communities that were especially strict in enforcing domestic violence laws. Communities like Nashville, Tennessee and San Diego, California saw even more dramatic reductions in domestic violence homicide as a result of strong programs to prevent domestic violence. Quincy, Massachusetts adopted its model in response to a series of domestic violence homicides and for many years they had no domestic violence homicides in Quincy.

Achieving a Massive Reduction in Domestic Violence Crime

As part of the research for my chapter I have had the opportunity to read about the practices that were so successful in Quincy and elsewhere. I have also read some of the ideas for improving the conditions in Poughkeepsie. We also have the research to establish improved practices in the custody courts. This is particularly important for reducing domestic violence crimes because abuser rights groups have been particularly successful in using common mistakes and flawed practices in the custody courts to undermine the progress society had made elsewhere in reducing domestic violence. The result of the failures in the custody courts has been that more battered mothers are staying with their abusers because they are afraid of being separated from their children and some of them do not survive this decision. Although some have attributed the recent rise in domestic violence homicide after many years of reduction to the bad economy, I believe the problems we see in the custody courts is the more likely explanation. Based upon the research and experience, I believe it would be easy for a group of domestic violence experts to create a best practices model that would result in a drastic reduction in domestic violence crimes.

The basic reforms that would create a massive reduction in domestic violence crime should not be in dispute. Experts may differ about some of the specifics around the edges, but the decisions on those issues would not affect the positive outcome if we included the practices that have been shown to work. We are working on a more complete and detailed agenda for the second volume of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY, but we already know the basics of what is needed. Here is what any reform agenda would include:

1. Coordinated Community Response: The communities that were most successful in reducing domestic violence homicide developed a coordinated community response in which all parts of the community came together to do their part in ending domestic violence. The professionals worked together to coordinate their response and included the domestic violence community as a key resource in the response to domestic violence. The communities had regular meetings to monitor how the campaign to end domestic violence was going and to make adjustments as needed.

2. Make it Easier for Victims to Obtain Protective Orders: Some people disparage protective orders as not worth the paper they are printed on and sometimes it is true, but women with protective orders are safer than those without. Society needs to make it less of a burden on battered women to obtain needed protection by having specified times when the court handles only protective orders so women can get in and out of court quickly. At other times judges should take protective orders before other cases because of the safety concerns. This is important because women may have work or family obligations that make it difficult to wait around the court in order to see a judge. Many judges get frustrated when women seek a protective order and then don’t return for the next court date. Reducing the burdens on victims will encourage them to follow through. At the same time there should be special clerks that help women fill out the forms and prosecutors’ offices should brief victims on the procedures they can expect. Finally judges should take domestic violence allegations more seriously, receive better training and make sure women who need protection can obtain the orders.

3. Strict Enforcement of Criminal Laws and Violations of Protective Orders: The heart of the programs that created a substantial reduction in domestic violence homicide was taking domestic violence seriously. This requires strict enforcement of domestic violence crimes and protective orders. Research demonstrates that abusive men tend to use a cost-benefit analysis in deciding whether to abuse their partners. That is why accountability and monitoring are the best ways to prevent domestic violence. The strict enforcement not only sends a message to the men held accountable, and their children, it sends a message to the entire community. The programs are often launched with important media coverage and those involved in the coordinated community response also help spread the message.

4. Lethality Assessment: The most important purpose of the laws, programs and practices designed to prevent domestic violence is the safety of victims and their children. One of the first things domestic violence advocates learn is safety planning and how to assess the danger. There are several common behaviors of abusers that have been shown to be related to an increased level of danger that domestic violence experts look at in making lethality assessments. These behaviors include choking, strangling or putting his hands around his partner’s throat, assaulting her while pregnant, raping or attempting to rape his partner, killing or hurting family pets, availability of guns, threats of suicide, homicide or kidnapping and a belief she has no right to leave. Incredibly, court professionals rarely use risk assessments or even understand the significance of these behaviors in making judgments about alleged abusers. Criminal courts should be using risk assessments to inform decisions about bail, protective orders and sentencing. Custody courts should use this information in determining custody and visitation arrangements that are safe for the victim and children.

5. Give Domestic Violence Cases the First Priority: Communities that reduced domestic violence crimes gave these cases the first priority. As discussed earlier this means making sure victims can get access to judges quickly so they don’t lose jobs or have to spend a lot of money on child care in order to protect themselves. It means local judges coming to arraignments after hours rather than releasing alleged offenders with an appearance ticket, but no protective order. It also means that custody courts must recognize most contested custody cases involve domestic violence and place a priority on the safety of the children and alleged victims.

6. Best Interests of the Child Should Mean Safety is the First Priority: The most important issue in deciding custody should be the safety of the children, but states usually have a list of factors to be considered and shockingly courts often focus on other less important issues. The second priority should be arrangements that give children the best chance to reach their potential.

7. Use of Current Scientific Research: When domestic violence first became a public issue there was no research to inform professionals about the best way to respond. When professionals modified their practices based on new research it has helped protect victims. Police departments went from practices of separating the parties and having the abuser walk around the block to cool off to a pro-arrest policy. Communities that created more accountability for abusers saw domestic violence crimes reduced. Child protective agencies that have partnered with domestic violence agencies and consulted with their advocates on potential domestic violence cases have been better able to recognize domestic violence and forge arrangements that protect children better. Police and prosecutors need to be aware of the frequency in which abusers involved in contested custody make deliberately false allegations and avoid wasting their resources persecuting their victims before fully investigating the allegations and speaking with the real victims. Custody courts have been particularly slow to modify practices based on current scientific research. They need to recognize most contested custody involve abusive fathers seeking custody as a tactic to maintain their control. They need to limit the role of mental health professionals to their area of expertise which is mental health and not domestic violence. They need to avoid inadequately trained professionals who continue to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations particularly in sexual abuse cases. The court must also stop permitting unscientific theories like Parental Alienation Syndrome.

8. Retraining Court Professionals: A lot of unfortunate events have combined to create widespread beliefs in a wide range of misinformation about domestic violence. Domestic violence is often counterintuitive which leads to misinformation. The lack of research when court professionals started responding also contributes to the problem. The widespread use of unqualified professionals has encouraged an undeserved confidence in false notions that make them harder to challenge and correct. The media has done a lousy job of covering domestic violence and often fails to understand who the experts are. Accordingly we need to retrain court professionals both to prevent the use of misinformation and to help the professionals learn about current scientific research, domestic violence dynamics and best practices. The training must have the active participation of genuine domestic violence experts such as dv advocates. Professionals working in criminal court must learn the importance of taking domestic violence seriously, prioritizing domestic violence cases and holding offenders strictly accountable. They should particularly learn how communities have dramatically reduced domestic violence homicide. Criminal court professionals must learn that accountability and monitoring are the only approaches shown to reduce domestic violence. Domestic violence is not caused by substance abuse, mental illness or anger management issues. Some offenders may have mental illness or substance abuse and domestic violence issues and each problem should be responded to separately. Custody court professionals must unlearn the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse. They need to look at the motivation of alleged abusers and understand the harm to children. They must learn that allegations of child sexual abuse have been totally mishandled and learn best practices to respond to these painful allegations. They also must learn that the way to include both parents in children’s lives that most benefits children is to require abusers to stop their harmful tactics instead of asking their victims to get over their fear and concern.

9. Use of Domestic Violence Experts: We now have a substantial body of specialized knowledge about domestic violence. Courts must stop relying on “experts” unfamiliar with this research and ignorant of domestic violence dynamics and instead listen to genuine domestic violence experts. Courts must stop refusing to listen to these genuine experts and especially until this information is better known to court professionals allow these experts to testify in order to educate the judge and other professionals.

10. Early Domestic Violence Hearings in Custody Cases: A large majority of contested custody cases are actually domestic violence cases. The research is very clear that unless the victim is unsafe, she should have custody and the abuser supervised visitation because that is what works best for children. Accordingly, custody courts can schedule an evidentiary hearing at the start of the case on the domestic violence issue. There is no need for evaluators or GALs as it is a factual issue. This will permit courts to resolve cases in a few hours or less that otherwise would take months or years and provide a huge savings in money and court time. Children also benefit because they don’t have to spend years worried about where they will live. This also avoids less important and distracting issues that only make it more difficult for the judge to understand the issues. This practice is likely to help courts make better decisions as well as quicker ones.

11. Use of Victim’s Advocate: The advocates are used by law enforcement to help and support the victim and provide information and training for law enforcement personnel. They are used in the prosecutor’s office for similar purposes and to acquaint the victim with the procedures. These practices should make survivors more comfortable and thus more likely to cooperate and press charges. In the court clerk’s office the advocate can help victims fill out forms and documents and explain the procedures. These procedures will help provide law enforcement and the courts with needed evidence while encouraging the complainant to continue to participate.

12. New Approach to Child Sexual Abuse in Custody Cases: Although most allegations of child sexual abuse made by mothers are true and deliberately false allegations are rare, 85% of sexual abuse allegations in custody cases result in custody for the alleged abuser and frequently little or no contact with the mother who sought to protect her child. This is a result of the difficulty in proving abuse of very young children and deeply flawed practices. Based especially on the new Department of Justice study led by Dr. Daniel Saunders, we should start by eliminating court professionals who believe in the myth that women frequently make false allegations. Professionals should be trained in best practices that would include understanding why a child might be reluctant to reveal sexual abuse or recant truthful allegations, use of play therapy for young children, avoid giving abusers additional opportunities to silence children and give children a chance to develop trusting relationships with therapists or other investigators before expecting them to discuss the abuse. We particularly need to abandon approaches that retaliate against mothers for good faith allegations.

13. Limit Role of Mental Health Professionals to their Area of Expertise: Mental health professionals are routinely used for evaluations and other services in domestic violence custody cases despite limited and often distorted information about domestic violence. This has contributed to the frequency in which courts place children in jeopardy. Mental health professionals have a role to play when a parent has a serious mental disorder that interferes with the ability to care for the children or other issues related to their field of study and practice. They should be limited to roles they are qualified for and at the very least consult with domestic violence experts on cases involving possible domestic violence.

14. Gender Bias: Over forty states and many districts have conducted court-sponsored gender bias committees that have found widespread gender bias. Other scientific research supports these findings. Women who kill their partner receive seventy percent longer sentences under similar circumstances as men who kill their partner. Women are given less credibility, higher standards of proof and are blamed for the actions of their abusers. Courts cannot do an effective job of responding to domestic violence as long as it continues to unconsciously favor male litigants. Court professionals must be trained about gender bias, attorneys and litigants must be protected and encouraged to raise concerns about gender bias, judges and other court professionals should be transferred, retrained or otherwise disciplined for continued gender biased practices and appellate courts must reverse cases based on gender bias.

15. Improved Police Role in Ending Domestic Violence: Police should make domestic violence cases a high priority and conduct an evidence based investigation instead of just relying on the victim’s testimony. Police must be trained to understand fathers involved in contested custody cases are 16 times more likely than mothers to make false allegations. This means they should take complaints from mothers seriously despite ongoing litigation, but have some skepticism of father’s allegations. They should always speak with the mother to understand the context before making a decision to make an arrest or bring charges. The police must also be aware that abusers tend to be very manipulative, but sometimes the police can use abusers’ sense of entitlement to encourage them to make statements that are actually admissions. Police departments must take precautions to respond to male officers who abuse their partners and particularly use their influence and relationship with other officers to undermine any investigation. There should be no tolerance for domestic violence or covering up domestic violence complaints. Departments should have a procedure for women to have someone in the department they can safely complain to about their partner’s abuse and any assistance other officers provide him.

Can Society Afford to Continue to Tolerate Domestic Violence? 

Politicians sometimes justify their failure to do more to stop domestic violence by citing the costs, but the reality is the costs are much greater by tolerating domestic violence. In reviewing a report about the response to domestic violence in Dutchess County, New York, I noticed how often they undermined substantial parts of the plan to prevent domestic violence in order to save small sums of money. The problem is when they are budgeting; they fail to consider the extra money that will be expended as a result of the increase in domestic violence encouraged by the cutbacks.

Children who witness domestic violence are more likely to engage in a wide range of harmful and costly behaviors including crime. Large majorities of the prison population were directly abused as children or witnessed domestic violence. This creates huge added expenses in police, courts, prosecutors, defense attorneys and prisons. It also creates more expenses in substance abuse treatment. This is in addition to the extra similar expenses in directly responding to domestic violence crimes and custody cases based on domestic violence.

An increase in domestic violence crimes also increases health care costs. Not only is the health care system used to heal the immediate physical wounds, but it leads to other medical problems based on the stress of living with domestic violence as well as emotional and psychological difficulties. If the woman has medical insurance his abuse is paid by all of the policy holders through higher premiums. If she does not have insurance she may not be able to pay for the care so that the rest of the public and the government ultimately pays. Many of the health costs are borne directly by various governmental entities.

When victims miss work it harms the economy thus reducing tax revenues. The same is true when women lose jobs because of injuries or repeated court dates. Government programs like unemployment insurance and crime victim compensation may also be triggered. Significantly domestic violence interferes with the ability to reach their potential. It is hard for women to reach their potential when dealing with domestic violence even if the injuries do not prove fatal. Men who commit domestic violence crimes can’t reach their potential if they are in jail and even if they are not jailed the time they waste abusing and harassing their partners can interfere with the ability to reach their potential. Children who witness domestic violence are significantly less likely to reach their potential and if the children grow up to hurt others these third parties also lose the ability to reach their potential. We don’t know if society will miss out on someone who would have discovered a medical cure, developed a patent, created a major new business or is just a productive member of society. All of this represents a massive loss of economic activity that translates into a huge loss of tax revenue.

While the proposal described above would include some additional expenses, it also includes plans that would save substantial tax dollars. Conducting early evidentiary hearings on domestic violence would help courts make better decisions, but also save substantial sums of money and judicial time. A large majority of contested custody cases which are the cases that take most of the court’s time are domestic violence cases. Since mothers rarely make deliberately false allegations of abuse, a hearing for an hour or two will avoid cases that often take many months or years. There will be no need to spend money on evaluators, GALs or other professionals who provide no help in recognizing or responding to domestic violence. Furthermore, as the practices outlined in this article become better known, abusive men will be less likely to commit domestic violence crimes and children will be sent an important message that domestic violence will not be tolerated. This will save significant sums initially and much greater amounts over time as the message resonates.

We don’t have figures on the full cost of domestic violence or the amount of money this proposal would save, but it has to be at least in the hundreds of billions of dollars. In that context attempting to save thousands of dollars by cutting local programs or a few million on programs nationally is counterproductive based on the financial costs and insane based on the human costs.

How to get Started Ending Domestic Violence

It is common rhetoric to say we should end domestic violence. We may not be able to prevent all domestic violence tactics or even all domestic violence crimes, but we know how to quickly create a massive reduction in domestic violence crimes and especially domestic violence homicide. How do we get from here to there?

Just as people in Quincy, Massachusetts, Nashville, Tennessee and San Diego, California came together to make ending domestic violence the leading priority other communities can do the same and it is easier because they have the successes of those communities to look at and a lot of additional research. Individual states can take the lead by adopting the needed law changes and provide funding to implement a program like the one discussed in this article.

This can also be done on a national basis. The President can announce that we will no longer tolerate domestic violence and create a program to encourage communities to implement the practices that work. Grants and other support can be provided to set up pilot projects around the country to demonstrate that these practices will work. Eventually the federal government can make implementation of these practices a requirement if states wish to receive any federal funding for law enforcement and the judicial system. This should be done on a non-partisan basis. Democrats claim to be supporters of women so they should certainly wish to free women from the fear and risk of domestic violence. Republicans regularly propose spending millions of dollars to promote abstinence for children. If they don’t want children having sex with their peers they certainly will wish to protect them from sex with adults. The bills to end domestic violence should be House 1 and Senate 1 to make them the first priority.

Several years ago I gave a presentation with Mo Therese Hannah at the NCADV Conference in Atlanta. I spoke about the success of Quincy, Nashville and San Diego in implementing these practices. After the workshop, a woman came up to me and told me what I said was no longer true. It seems a new administration took over in Nashville, dismantled the successful program and the domestic violence homicide rate went back up. This was disappointing news, but it also confirmed that it was these practices that are the difference between a substantial reduction in domestic violence crime and requiring women’s lives to be impacted by men’s abuse of their intimate partners.

Domestic violence is not inevitable. It can be prevented. Our daughters and granddaughters can grow up in a world in which domestic violence crimes are rare. The worst crime would be if we take the knowledge, research and ability we have to substantially reduce domestic violence crimes and instead find some excuse to force women and children to continue to suffer.

Barry Goldstein is a nationally recognized domestic violence expert, speaker, writer and consultant. He is the co-editor with Mo Therese Hannah of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. Barry can be reached by email at their web site www.Domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com

Open Court

By Heidi Hiatt

Those who’ve read my article on police records might be interested to check out an experiment in Massachusetts called OpenCourt. Here’s an explanation of it from their site:

OpenCourt is an experimental project run by WBUR, Boston’s NPR news station, that uses digital technology to make Quincy District Court more accessible to the public. Anyone with an internet connection will be able to see and hear what goes on in court.


I have no doubt that this concept will spread and it will be deemed a success by open government advocates. On the surface, it sounds like a decent use of modern technology that will contribute to government transparency.

Yes, I have some questions about and issues with this. I’m already on the record as a proponent of open government, but not at the expense of people’s privacy. Yes, I’ve heard it all, “there is no right to privacy,” “the Internet killed privacy,” and so on. But if we weren’t concerned about privacy, then government agencies wouldn’t be advising people to take steps against identity theft or try to keep crime victims and children safe.

My first concern is that victims and witnesses may have to go before a camera. It is true that the public can already sit in on many courtroom proceedings. But this is different because not only does it capture images and intimate details of proceedings, but it puts it on the world wide web. We bloggers know– once on the web, always on the web.

Second, this is what I mean about the distinction being victims and suspects being blurred. Subjecting both to video that goes on the web means they are being treated equally. Are projects like this going to blur out a victim’s likeness or distort their voice? Probably not, given that these broadcasts are streaming live.
While written court records are very open, allowing anyone access to video of victims is disturbing. The way our justice system handles records can victimize innocent parties a second or third time. Not only does a victim, witness, or complainant have to come forward a first time to report a crime or be interviewed, they may be investigated, have to testify against the suspect, seek a protection order against them, or have personal details of their lives released openly.

Now they have to be on TV? I looked around the OpenCourt site to determine if they show victims in their broadcasts, but so far am not finding anything that says they don’t. It seems wrong that these men, women, and children have gone through so much already, and then their anguish, anger, tears, confusion, or fear might be broadcast live. I can just imagine hungry sociopaths searching for their next victims via court TV.

My third concern is for juveniles. It appears that this particular court is not broadcasting cases involving juveniles. That is a sound decision, because many states protect juvenile records and generally don’t release images of kids. As the live streaming practice spreads, however, yet another class of formerly protected parties in the justice system may find their likeness and records publicly disclosed.

Fourth, this could be a safety risk for law enforcement personnel. Some cops I know are not okay with pictures of themselves being on the Internet. Some police departments shield digital images of their officers from public disclosure in the interest of their safety. I can’t speak for the cops in my life, but I’m confident that some of them wouldn’t be too fond of this.

Finally, projects like this make it seem like the traditional divide between having open records to police the conduct of government rather than the conduct of the individual is gone. This is a media-sponsored project, and the media is often heavily involved in open government advocacy. While I’m a firm believer in a free press, that does not mean that everybody’s business should be aired without restraint all of the time. I also remind myself that most media outlets are for-profit businesses.

This level of transparency may be useful in holding public officials accountable. But it can be detrimental to other participants in criminal and civil cases. It’s easy to say, “oh yeah! Now those judges can’t get away with anything!” or “it’s pretty cool to be watching live court from home.” However, putting yourself in the shoes of the people who may not want to be on TV and feeling what they feel might give you a very different perspective.

There has to be a balance between the public’s right to know and people’s personal information. But in the digital age, public records seem to be becoming a free-for-all in which nothing seems sacred anymore and everybody wants to watch. It will be interesting to see how this project deals with such issues.

Privacy is the right to be alone—the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized man. –Louis D. Brandeis

“Ghostbusters”

By Lavinia Masters

There are many questions and issues that arise when it comes to processing some of these "cold-case" rape kits that sit on the shelves by thousands all over the country. One of the issues that come up is that some of the victims knew their assailants...personally I do not understand how that concern can even arise especially since you have the evidence to rule out if that crime actually occurred as well as the opportunity to see if the assailant has a pattern of violating others or if they're the "missing link" to other unsolved rape cases. Then the one concern that cuts to the core of my soul every time I hear it is the concern over the cost and who will pay for it. I am disturbed when this is mentioned because you cannot put a price tag on the restoration of a victim after something as heinous as sexual assault has occurred. I am convinced that human life is worth more than $1,000 dollars, I am convinced that a victim's sanity is priceless...I am convinced because I was that victim at the age of 13 brutally raped in my home and not knowing who my attacker was for over 20 years...I was the one that lived in constant fear and paranoia because I did not know if he did in fact know my family and was lying in wait to attack and kill me like he promised on July 31, 1985.

Living as a victim of sexual assault, I had many ghosts that haunted me on a daily basis for over 20 years and although many were defeated by my faith and the grace of God; the ghost of the "unknown" or not knowing my perpetrator continued to haunt me. As you may or may not know that it is a traditional belief that a ghost is a soul or spirit of a dead person or animal that can appear in visible form or another manifestation to the living. Ghosts are generally described as solitary essesences that haunt particular locations, objects or people they were associated with in life. The summer before my assault there was a summer blockbuster that was released on June 8, 1984 entitled, "Ghostbusters". This movie later turned out to be one of my favorite all time movies- the basic plot of this movie was that 3 unemployed parapsychology professors set up shop as a unique ghost removal service. Then fast forward to May 2005; a determined Sergeant of the Dallas Police Department along with a compassionate victim coordinator and their associates set up shop with a unique ghost removal service as well. The ghosts they decided to remove were the ghosts of a victims pain...the ghosts of depression, confusion, bitterness, strife, anger but mainly the ghost of not knowing whom a victims assailant was...and the weapon that destroyed these ghosts...was the weapon of DNA!

As I write this piece I know that there are many Ghostbusters reading this...there are doctors, lawyers, judges, SANE nurses, victim coordinators, law enforcement, victim advocates, media, etc. You must realize that we not only have a powerful such as DNA to help destroy these ghosts of victims past but you have the heart, compassion, purpose and obligation to promote healing and restoration in a victim’s life as well as raise awareness to the public about DNA.

So if anyone ever asks you why police should take the time, money and effort to evaluate and re-open these "cold-case" sexual assaults....tell them my story…because I ain’t afraid of no ghost anymore!



Lavinia Masters

The Defeatist Attitude of the Domestic Violence Movement: The Need for Prevention

By Lyn Twyman

There's a defeatist attitude in the domestic violence movement in this country.  There are several state coalitions and organizations that instead of coming together and finding solutions, they bicker, whine and complain about why things aren't working.  They are keeling over in the wallow of despair and have become more concerned with the continuous band aid remedy instead of writing a prescription (words in part by Susan Murphy-Milano) for the domestic violence epidemic.  They lack the utilization of prevention, intervention and technology to keep victims and the public at large safe.  As a result, newer, more comprehensive methods like the Mosaic Method, The Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit, and now the National Domestic Violence Registry are being embraced in growing numbers throughout the United States in response to the lack of prevention in this country. 

Recently I spoke with the executive director of one of the largest state domestic violence coalitions in the country.  Within the first minute of phone introductions, the executive director was almost hollering at the top of her voice at this mild mannered, gracious advocate.  Her voice was filled with anger and a heaviness of breath as if she was about to explode.   I am a survivor of domestic violence and I made that very clear to her in our conversation, not some person who is far removed from this issue.  That didn't matter to her, however.  Her words to me were, "Most of us are survivors so that's neither here nor there."  Ladies and gentlemen, these were the words of the leader of an organization whose mission is to help victims of domestic violence!  And what was she so upset about?  She was upset at the fact that she returned my call to discuss The National Domestic Violence Registry and desire to engage in a friendly dialogue of solutions to the problem of domestic violence.  After all, her organization came highly recommended from several sources.  Never did I think that she would become an angry individual over the phone in just a matter of seconds.

The executive director proceeded to make comments like a sex offender registry was better than a domestic violence registry, that victims will end up in the registry, that a registry will cost millions of dollars, that a domestic violence registry won't work!  But I'd like to publicly rebut those comments here:

No. 1 For any domestic violence advocate to deny her own cause and minimize victims is appalling and a sick tragedy to the movement of helping crime victims especially, in this case, domestic violence. 

No. 2 The National Domestic Violence Registry has created a model where we encourage the states to take a greater look at repeat offender records.

No. 3 Domestic violence is causing this country billions of dollars each year in just its aftermath alone.  Millions of dollars is nothing compared to the billions that are wasted on cleaning up the gruesome battlefield.  As the saying goes, 'An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'  There’s no price tag that can be placed on any person’s life.

No. 4 A domestic violence registry, just like any program, will work if it's run effectively.  There are many coalitions and organizations that have programs now that aren't effective.  So to that executive director, her statement was one of a curious, eyebrow raising sort, not a resilient, hopeful one.  And aren’t we to be positive change makers if we are to continue to help victims survive this battlefield?

Why aren't some of these coalitions focusing more on prevention with the funding and man power that they currently have? I believe it's because many organizations, like the sounds of that executive director, are simply burned out, defeated by working in a system for 15 to 30 years.  Additionally, to that executive director, she mentioned carrying the frustration at going through domestic violence records, finding it hard to determine who the real victims are.  But frustration will get us NO WHERE.  What she has managed to do is to become so desensitized that to me the evidence of compassion burnout has dominated her speech and rationale. Change is not too much to ask for those who are living in the nightmare of domestic violence or for those who have lost a loved one to it.

Many people said the sex offender registry would not work but it does work, and it's very telling when an executive director for one of the largest domestic violence coalitions says that a sex offender registry is better than a domestic violence registry, again denying her own cause.  Why are advocates like this ED giving up and even discriminating against the very people they're paid to help.  Why are they choosing to fight against the legislatures that are trying to help them and others in the community?   We all know that help is hard to find these days and it seems that victim services are being stale mated in part by the very people who say they want to help.  So we are truly at a sad state right now in this country because of this unhealthy mentality.   Talk about unhealthy relationships, there are unhealthy mentalities within the domestic violence movement and it's quite sickening.  According to Benjamin Lichtenwalner, founder of Modern Servant Leader, he writes, “frustration is a sign that you may be focused on yourself and not the needs of others. Therefore, as a leader in you[r] organization, frustration should be a warning sign to you as well. When you feel frustrated, remember your calling as a leader to serve those you lead, first.”  Leaders of domestic violence organizations should work extra hard to avoid letting frustration overtake them as to avoid lashing out at strangers and fellow advocates so solutions to helping victims can be created and more prevention takes place in this country.

Had the executive director not chosen to lash out at me, maybe she would have learned more about The National Domestic Violence Registry and all of the wonderful educational models and programs we promote, created by survivors, survivors of lost loved ones, and even leading experts.  Her assumptions were wrong and quite closed minded, a ‘Let’s cut her off at the chase because it’s either my way or the high way’ thought process, no respect for the person she chose to call back.  But as I told that executive director, domestic violence registries are not going away, and instead of working with the states, organizations, and survivors that want to see change in this way, organizations like hers are fighting against women and men that want more preventative solutions.  Like I said, it's time to stop putting band aids on the problem and start writing prescriptions.

There are thousands and thousands of repeat offenders of domestic violence each year including misdemeanor and felonious civil and criminal offenders.   These are the ones who belong in the registry.  Yes, it's a given that some state laws have to be changed, but the assumption on the part of some domestic violence coalitions and organizations who just continue to make excuses against prevention models, instead of saying 'How can we make this work?', is getting quite old and more and more people are dying to domestic violence.  And it's not necessarily that all of those said orgs just don't want change, it's that they're afraid and stuck on old ways of thinking.  And yes, some of them are afraid of losing funding. 

The realities that victims face today include modern day complications that require modern day solutions.  The domestic violence movement has progressed but there are some that are stuck back in time 15 years ago, advocate organizations and law makers alike.  That's why it's important to work together, not go on the attack at survivors, organizations and legislatures who finally decide to speak up. This crabs in a barrel, defeatist attitude feeds the abusers and re-victimizes the victims.  It doesn’t empower the victims into becoming survivors nor help the families that have lost loved ones.  It doesn't help in shattering the silence of domestic violence.  The sad thing about it is, this defeatist attitude will continue to keep all of us in a losing battle if we don't create and implement more preventative solutions very soon.  There's no more time for the domestic violence field to poke its mouth out and pout any longer.

So to the women and male survivors, to the children survivors, to the elderly survivors, to the disabled survivors, to the LGBT survivors, and to the families and friends that grieve everyday for lost loved ones, I say this to you, you are not forgotten.  The National Domestic Violence Registry and its partners will not bear a defeatist attitude.  We have a team of experts and supporters that want to see change and we welcome EVERYONE with an idea on how to make prevention stronger in this country. 

They said ending slavery was a bad idea.  They said desegregation was a bad idea.  They said the feminist movement was a bad idea.  They said The National Sex Offender Registry was a bad idea.  So let's end the slavery of domestic violence, the fear that causes even coalition executive directors to lash out at those they say they have committed to serve.  The National Domestic Violence Registry and public state registries aren't bad; they are indeed good and to the benefit of the public at large.

Domestic violence is the number 1 killer of women in this country.  We all have the right to know if someone is a repeat domestic abuse offender.  It's better to find out in order to prevent the assault from occurring again than to lie over a casket and cry aloud to the high heavens 'I wish he/she had known'.  And yes, a registry will be a deterrent against repeat offenders.  The evidence won’t be in more deaths, it will be in people becoming more aware of repeat offenders, the seriousness of these offenses, and making more informed decisions. This will logically result in fewer deaths.  So the time is here; the time is now.  Don't talk about why something can't work; talk about why it will work and save lives. 

And now I’d like to leave you with this.  The Japanese have a bond of unity, a tradition called "ittai," which means to become one body.  In the midst of national crises, they have learned to organize themselves and support each other without little instruction from the government or outside interception.   Domestic violence is one of our country’s national crises.  The domestic violence field can take a big lesson from the Japanese and practice some “ittai”.