Washington Post – Sunday, March 7, 2010: AS EXPECTED, the Maryland House Judiciary Committee wrongly killed a bill on Thursday that would have made it easier for victims of domestic violence to obtain protective orders. H.B. 700 would have brought Maryland into conformance with the practices of every other state in the country. As an election-year service to voters, here is the 15 to 6 vote:
Chairman Joseph F. Vallario Jr. (D-Prince George’s) did not vote, as is the general practice.
Against: Curtis S. Anderson (D-Baltimore), Benjamin S. Barnes (D-Prince George’s), Jill P. Carter (D-Baltimore), Frank M. Conaway Jr. (D-Baltimore), Donald H. Dwyer Jr. (R-Anne Arundel), William J. Frank (R-Baltimore County), J.B. Jennings (R-Baltimore County), Kevin Kelly (D-Allegany), Gerron S. Levi (D-Prince George’s), Tony McConkey (R-Anne Arundel), Victor R. Ramirez (D-Prince George’s), Samuel I. Rosenberg (D-Baltimore), Todd L. Schuler (D-Baltimore County), Luiz R.S. Simmons (D-Montgomery) and Michael D. Smigiel Sr. (R-Cecil).
For: Kathleen M. Dumais (D-Montgomery), Benjamin F. Kramer (D-Montgomery), Susan C. Lee (D-Montgomery), Susan McComas (R-Harford), Kriselda Valderrama (D-Prince George’s) and Jeffrey D. Waldstreicher (D-Montgomery).
Remind Maryland lawmakers that domestic violence victims will not forget how they have been pushed to the side once again. Here are links to information and contact info on the legislators who voted against this important bill.
Michael Smigiel Sr.
Todd Schuler
Samuel Rosenberg
Victor Ramirez
Tony McConkey
Gerron Levi
Kevin Kelly
J. B. Jennings
William Frank
Donald Dwyer Jr.
Frank Conaway Jr.
Jill Carter
Benjamin Barnes
Curtis Anderson
Luiz Simmons
Delegate Levi
Thank you for your devoted work on population control. Have you ever heard of murder by proxy? HB 700 would have helped prevent that. Just think of all the women and children you have helped to eliminate. No more transfer payments, no more need to devote prosecutors time and no need for all those jail cells. They were a bunch of whiners and criers anyway. Now you won’t have to listen to them.
Good for you, bad for THEM. Meet the women at the voting booth, and while you are at it, I hope you take the time to look at the faces of all of them in their coffins. How many abuser supplied dollars did it take to lobby you on this one?
Del Levi-
How would you explain how a mother that finally gets the courage to leave her abuser in efforts to protect their two innocent children (keep in mind, 2 protective orders with clear and convincing evidence) and then ultimately loses custody because the abusers manipulate the courts, evaluators, etc. Not only has the victim been traumatized but who is protecting our innocent children? Do you know the effects on children who have witnessed DV? Know wonder why the dockets stay full in juvenile court. Again, this is a common occurence but fails to be exposed. What message does this send to the community.
LINDSEY-
How dare you point your finger at Dr. Castillo and tell her it was her obligation and she failed to protect he children. Instead of talking without knowing all the facts, why dont you take a look at her case before you speak. Clearly, Dr. Castillo was trying to protect her children. Its apparent you haven’t experienced what its like to live in fear.
As someone who has been infront of Judge Dugan and he has said. “Im convinced the DV occured as two other judges in this court found clear and convincing evidence an assualt occurred. I mean I don’t know if you were just at wits end with her or what”
Need I say more. Don’t act as if you know what you are talking about because you clearly dont. Until you have been in the shoes of a victim, you are just as ignorant as Del Levi. I don’t wish anyone to have to suffer in an abusive relationship, but perhaps if you were a victim, you’d get it and I am sure you would be preaching a different tune.
Before you make accusations against Dr. Castillo and how she failed to protect her children, do your homework. Sure, there are organizations such as the House of Ruth but due to the severity of DV in this society and in particular in the county we live in, THEY DONT HAVE THE RESOURCES TO HELP EVERYONE just as the States Attorneys office doesnt have enough to handle the DV Docket so your case becomes not proscecuted or the charges against the abuser become Noelle. Again, do you homework before you start lashing out at someone. I suggest you go to the family justice center, educate yourself on the lethality assessment.
Oddly in MoCo you have to wait to get help from the Abused Persons Program or any other assistance. But until these judges hold the abusers accountable the cycle will go on and on.
Perhaps you should rethink you position and acknowledge what Dr. Castillo did to protect her children and the system failed. We all know a protective order is just a piece of paper and in some cases, one can be a repeat violator and nothing happens. Nothing happens until you get someone who is passionate about DV or understands it; whether it be a Sheriff (who luckily have a full grasp and understanding on the dynamics), perhaps one of the few MoCo police officers or even a Judge. Until we break the stereotype of who the victims are, we won’t get the protection we need.
The Hon. Judge Eric Johnson once said, “What message does this send to the community” Give that some thought.
Del Levi-
I think you need to wake up and see what is going on in today’s society. Because of people like you and your ignorance to DV, the system fails victims such as myself. You don’t know what its like to be in a victims shoes and perhaps you need to look at it from that perspective. I am sure if one of your family members or your daughter needed a protective order you would think differently.
Perhaps if you were more educated and spent some time learning about DV, you would be able to better understand the abuser/victim role. Have you ever noticed the media doesnt really report on any DV cases unless there is a fatality? Why…..because until you become a statistic of the system failing you nobody wants to stand up and expose what victims go through on a daily basis. Its much easier to report when the system fails and there is a death……the story is over as well.
Luckily, I don’t live in PG County but will make sure my network is fully aware of your position. We certainly don’t need another ignorant person in office, especially a CE.
Its 2010….time for you to get with the program.
Wow, as a young Maryland woman, I have an appreciation for the gravity and prevalence of domestic violence. However, as I read the author’s blog, and those of other domestic violence advocates, there is a trend to see all cases from the worst domestic violence vantage point, with a kind of tunnel vision that ignores all other perspectives. I have interned in the court system and spent time in DV court. What I personally observed is: Overwhelmingly, most petitions for protective orders are granted; extremely few cases involve actual physical harm to victims; sometimes respondents, usually men, are innocent; few cases are brought where the petitioner has completely clean hands, or where there has not been some level of mutual abuse, affray, or violence; prosecutors take these cases extremely seriously; far more female petitioners are represented by counsel than are male respondents; the bringing of these petitions does create a stigma that male respondents must overcome for purposes of custody whether orders are granted or not, and whether there is any issue of abuse regarding the children or not; judges tend to err on the side of caution and grant orders even when a petitioner’s testimony or evidence is sketchy.
What happened to Dr. Castillo is absolutely one of the worst tragedies that could happen to a woman to have her children murdered by her abusive,mentally unstable, husband after she had attempted to secure protection. As horrible as her situation is, it is still only one case, and it is my understanding that she erred in allowing her husband to take her children with full knowledge that he was very mentally ill. A protective order would not have been enough to prevent her tragedy. Perhaps, she should have sought to have her husband committed in an emergency proceeding regarding his mental instability rather than just seeking a protective order in a case where there was no physical or tangible evidence of violence. If she truly believed her children were in danger, could she have not sought protection from a shelter such as House of Ruth?
This is not to absolve the court of its responsibility, or the legislature of its responsibility. But, ultimately, it was the responsibility of Dr. Castillo, as it is that of every mother, and every parent, to protect her children.
I hope this does not generate extreme wrath. Although, I imagine it will. Nonetheless, I remain convinced that we are all entitled to our opinions and no issue is one sided.
Thanks for reading.
Delegate Levi says she has supported legislation to help domestic violence victims, but seems to have fallen victim herself to some brainwashing by the “false allegation” crowd. The false allegation crowd are generally part of the “abuser’s lobby,” the large group of alleged domestic abusers who claim to be falsely accused, often claim to be victims of the fictitious “parental alienation,” and spew out copius amounts of mindless rhetoric. This reposting of rhetoric doesn’t work here. You didn’t put your money where your mouth is if you really want to support victims. Changing this standard of proof would not likely create any more protection, because the culture seems to be that the alleged abusers are innocent victims who are falsely accused rather than having concern for the real abuse victims.
If Delegate Levi is concerned that someone might be falsely accused and she doesn’t want them to have an electronic record than here is another solution: Stop making victims try to get protection and actually allow women and children to leave what they deem to be an abusive situation using their own common sense. You can write a law that says all women who feel endangered and who feel their children are endangered have the absolute right to protect themselves as they see fit without any court of law being able to force the woman or her children to have contact with any person the mother or child deems to be potentially dangerous. This would not create an electronic record. There would be no need to go to court and “ask permission” to protect yourself or your children. Men would benefit too, because they would not have to defend themselves against these so-called “false allegations.” This would have the additional benefit of reducing court costs, there would be so many less cases filed. The additional money saved from all those jammed court dockets could be used to help victims relocate. As long as women can leave WITH THEIR CHILDREN, they have a much better chance of staying alive.
If this could be put into law then all women and children would be free to leave abusive situations without fear of being “falsely accused” of making “false allegations.” There certainly are a lot of false accusations going on, like the false allegation against Amy Castillo by the judge that her testimony wasn’t credible. Amy Castillo was right, her children were in danger. This could only be proven to be 100% true now that her children are dead. If her children had not died, she would not have been able to vindicate herself of this false allegation that she was not credible.
So are you willing to come up with some legislation that will let victims protect themselves and really be free from abuse?
Dear Del. Levi,
Thank you very much for responding to my post. I used to live in Maryland, but I left about a decade and a half ago following a horrendous divorce and custody case that involved domestic violence. In the end, I retained custody of my child and I was permitted to move to Massachusetts. For obvious reasons, how Maryland handles protective orders is very important to me both as a survivor and as a concerned citizen.
Every other state in the country goes by a “preponderance of the evidence” regarding domestic violence rather than “clear and convincing evidence”. In all other civil matters, Maryland courts require only a preponderance of evidence. As a woman who survived abuse, I know how important it is for abused women to be heard and believed. When I lived in Maryland it was a much more progressive state than it is now. In the past decade and a half, legislators have been inundated with propaganda, lies, and garbage by fathers’ rights and men’s rights activists. Since leaving the state, Maryland has gone backwards in its dealings with abuse cases, particularly in the context of contested custody cases and divorce. Women and children have been greatly harmed by this new and negative attitude.
I noticed in your comment that you are concerned for the alleged abusers, in particular about false allegations of domestic violence. Just so you know, bona fide false allegations of domestic violence are rare. They account for only about 8% of all allegations of domestic violence. These facts have been overshadowed by propaganda coming from father’s and men’s rights activists in Maryland who say that false allegations of domestic violence are rampant, especially in custody cases, and that women frequently file for protective orders in order to gain an upper hand in divorce. None of this propaganda is true.
Please see these excerpts from papers about domestic violence and protective orders for the facts about both:
Rita Smith (NCADV) & Pamela Coukos (PCADV), “Fairness and Accuracy in Evaluations of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Custody Determinations”, The Judges Journal, Fall 1997, Pp. 38-56:
“(…)Although both common sense and the prevailing legal standard dictate careful consideration of evidence in domestic or family violence when determining custody, allegations of domestic violence and/or child sexual abuse made during a divorce or custody proceeding are not always taken seriously. These allegations often are wrongly perceived as false because they are asserted in a contentious environment and because of the widespread myth that parents fabricate domestic violence and child abuse allegations in order to gain an advantage in court. When combined with the misuse of psychological syndrome evidence, the perception that a parent has fabricated the allegations often results in unfair retribution against the reporting protective parent. (…)
Using unscientific “syndrome” evidence can have serious consequences, and according to the American Psychological Association, in domestic violence cases, “psychological evaluators not trained in domestic violence may contribute to this process by ignoring or minimizing the violence and by giving *inappropriate pathological labels* to women’s responses to chronic victimization.” (APA, Report of the APA Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family, 40 (1996)) The protective parent’s mental “impairment” can be used to portray her as a less fit parent, and justify granting custody to the batterer. She may have to attend on-going mediation or marriage counseling with her abuser, endangering her further. In a worst case scenario, the diagnosis can result in the protective mother’s loss of the child to foster care and even the ultimate termination of her parental rights. This can result in placement of the child back into the custody of the abuser, endangering the child further.
Unscientific syndrome theories also feed on a serious misperception of the rate of false accusations. In its Report of the Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family, the APA confirms that, “false reporting of Family violence occurs infrequently… reports of child sexual abuse do not increase during divorce and actually occur in only about 2 percent to 3 Percent of the cases… even during custody disputes, fewer than 10 percent of cases involve reports of child sexual abuse (APA Report, 12). If Parental Alienation Syndrome were as common as Gardner reports – 90 percent of his caseload – then the reporting of abuse should be much more prevalent. Furthermore, the overall reported rates should be dramatically higher in cases where custody is an issue as compared with the general population of families. But studies examining this comparison do not find significantly higher rates of any abuse allegations raised during divorce or custody proceedings. (Cheri Wood, “The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Dangerous Aura of Reliability”, 27 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 1367-8, n. 7 1994) Moreover, these studies find only a very small rate of fabricated allegations in this context. (Nancy Thoenes & Patricia G. Tjaden, “The Extent, Nature and Validity of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Custody/Visitation Disputes”, 14 Child Abuse and Neglect 151, 161-2 (1990) As the APA documents, “when objective investigations are conducted into child sexual abuse reports that surface during divorce or custody disputes, the charges are as likely to be confirmed as are reports made at other times.” (APA Report, note 8 at 12)
–__–__–
MYTH: Restraining Orders Are Easy To Get.
All A Woman Need Do Is Lie Or State That She Is Afraid,
And She Can Force An Innocent Man Out Of His Own Home
The WBA Law Journal
May, 1999, Vol. III No. 1
Why Attorneys Should Routinely
Screen Clients for Domestic Violence
By Pauline Quirion, Esq.
Excerpts:
In the recent landmark decision, Custody of Vaughn, the Supreme Judicial Court has observed that “[t]he very frequency of domestic violence . . . may have the effect of inuring courts to it and thus minimizing its significance.” A 1994 study of batterers based on the database used to track restraining orders concluded that:
[t]he high frequency with which RO’s [sic] are issued might lead some
skeptics to assume that these orders are granted too easily for minor
offenses and almost any man is at risk of being a defendant. The data
from the new RO database in Massachusetts reflect otherwise. Men
against whom RO’s have been used are clearly not a random draw
from the population. They are likely to have a criminal history, often
reflective of violent behavior toward others.
Research suggests that false reports of family violence occur infrequently. Although many believe that women especially will lodge false charges of child abuse or battering against their spouses in an effort to manipulate or retaliate, the rate of false reports in these circumstances is no greater than for other crimes.
Most batterers minimize and deny the frequency and severity of their abusive conduct. Similarly, victims often underreport and may minimize the abuse. They may be embarrassed or fear that disclosure will lead to retaliation by the abuser, financial hardship or personal stigma. In addition, some practitioners fail to appreciate that abuse cuts across all class lines and stereotype abuse victims as primarily indigent. These dynamics make it easy for an untrained practitioner to gloss over information pointing to domestic violence and which may be relevant to a client’s case or continued safety.
–__–__–
I hope that when and if this bill is reintroduced that Maryland delegates vote for it instead of making it more difficult for victims of domestic violence to be heard and believed. Please place Maryland in compliance with the rest of the country when it comes to protective orders. Abused women need them.
Sincerely,
Trish Wilson
Delegate Levi:
With all due respect on your ‘watch’ you killed a Domestic Violence Bill that spit in the face of a womens murdered children Dr. Amy Castillo.
On Your watch you voted NO to what you “feel” Domestic Violence ‘victims’ SHOULD be getting Nationwide. As a Domestic Violence survivor You are as bad as the Abusers that continue to prey and your laws reflect that.
On my watch, I have been proud as a member of Maryland’s House Judiciary Committee to sponsor, co-sponsor and support law and legislation requiring abusers to surrender firearms as part of domestic violence protective orders, lengthening the term of protective orders, enabling more services to victims of domestic violence, among other improvements to Maryland law. Between July 1st and December 31st last year, 10,049 petitions reached a final protective order hearing in Maryland and just 742 or 7% were denied because the person seeking protection could not meet the required burden of proof. I am searching for how many states in this country that beat that number — states that are denying fewer requests for protective orders than Maryland. Even as a woman lawmaker who is committed to protecting women from domestic violence, I must try to be fair to both the alleged abuser and the alleged victim in what are essentially criminal charges in a civil proceeding. Charges that will create a permanent public record for the alleged abuser, available to employers, landlords and others even if the domestic violence charge is dropped, dismissed or a final protective order is never entered. Even when horrid cases are grabbing headlines, lawmakers must try to examine the law and protect victims without creating public records in an electronic age that undermine the presumption of innocence until found guilty. I cannot support lowering the burden of proof for protective orders, but I feel at peace that domestic violence victims are getting as much protection from Maryland courts as they could get anywhere in the United States.
State Delegate Gerron S. Levi
Candidate for Prince George’s County Executive
http://www.votelevi.com