Abuse of Power

THE clearinghouse on police-perpetrated domestic violence

...police victims' special circumstances affect legal strategies

Prosecution

EXCERPT from When the Batterer Is a Law Enforcement Officer: A Guide for Advocates (The complete Guide (96 pgs) is available in PDF format at no charge through the Battered Women's Justice Project.)

You may want the state to prosecute your abuser. You may believe that if the state holds him accountable for his violence against you, he will stop abusing you. Or, you may believe that prosecution would increase your danger. You may fear that your abuser would retaliate against you if he was convicted and lost his career.

Whether or not the state "presses charges" is not your decision. The prosecutor has the authority and discretion to determine which cases the state prosecutes. The prosecutor may ask you whether you want the state to pursue charges, but is under no obligation [personal account] to honor your wishes.

The prosecutor bases the decision on many factors. Many of these factors may be intertwined with the fact that your abuser is a police officer. Some prosecutors avoid cases involving police officers, others vigorously pursue them. Nationwide, relatively few officers are arrested for domestic violence, and only a small percentage of those are prosecuted.

Prosecutors may decide not to pursue a case against an officer because they work closely with the police. Prosecutors and police officers often have close friendships. Prosecutors rely on the police to investigate, collect evidence, and prepare reports in every case the state pursues. Prosecuting a police officer runs the risk of alienating the police department from the prosecutor's office.

The prosecutor may face political pressure to avoid the case, particularly if there appears to be little public support for prosecuting the officer, a risk of losing campaign endorsements, or a clash with the mayor.

Prosecutors generally prefer to commit the state’s time and resources to cases they believe will result in a conviction. To win a conviction, the state has to be able to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable" doubt. Prosecutors know it can be difficult to meet this standard in a case involving a police officer. Responding and investigating officers may be reluctant to actively help the prosecution — or may deliberately obstruct it. Even with strong evidence, such as medical documentation and photographs of injuries, 911 tapes and police reports, judges and juries often resist finding officers guilty of domestic violence.

A prosecutor might proceed if there is enough strong evidence and if there is a high risk to the community. The prosecutor may be pressured by the public to hold officers accountable for criminal conduct, particularly if the case has received media attention.

Your Role in Prosecution

Your role in prosecution is to be a witness for the state. Many people may be trying to influence your decision whether to cooperate with the state by giving a statement and testifying against your abuser in court. It may be difficult for you to know whose advice to follow and who to trust.

The prosecutor may fear that you may be intimidated or coerced into withdrawing or recanting your statement. In order to avoid having to rely on your voluntary testimony, the prosecutor will want to have enough evidence to proceed without your cooperation. This is called "evidence-based prosecution." The prosecutor can coerce you into testifying via subpoenas and threats of jail for refusing to cooperate, with little regard for your safety and well-being.

Victims commonly relay their experiences:

  • Fellow officers and the abuser's family members came to court to support him. The victims and their supporters and/or witnesses felt intimidated by his supporters’ presence.
  • The abuser's attorney looked for inconsistencies in their testimony in an effort to destroy their credibility.
  • The abusers' attorneys twisted the facts to make it look like the victims were the aggressors and their abusers were the "real" victims.
  • Officers who testified invoked the "code of silence" and refused to incriminate their fellow officer.
  • The abusers presented themselves well in court, were confident and composed. The victims felt they "fell apart" under severe cross-examination and thereby lost credibility.
  • The judges or juries appeared to be biased in favor of the officer because of his profession.

If you are involved — willingly or not — in your abuser's prosecution, consider calling an advocate from a local domestic violence agency or Diane Wetendorf for consultation on your case.