Craig Minns

You articulated the situation extremely well...far better than I could. Bravo!

Dr Russell, police issue interim DVO/AVO with no recourse to courts and a Magistrate will ratify that order if asked. There is no requirement for evidence to be tendered in support of the application if police have already issued an interim order: it will go through on the nod.

Magistrates are acting under instruction. In issuing DVOs they are doing exactly as they are told they should. If you think about it, its a situation in which the magistrate has no option other than to do so, based on a narrow analysis of correlation without causality. Imagine the uproar from DV advocates if a magistrate declines to issue an order and violence then occurs.

As I said, we can't go on this way, it is destructive.

Craig:
“Fair dinkum fellas, Rosie Batty lost her son in extremely brutal circumstances. Let's have a bit of decorum eh?”

It is not lacking in decorum to discuss the private feelings of someone when they express those feelings on national media. I am not talking about the sadness and grief she is feeling which everyone feels who loses a child. I am talking about the guilt she displays which most people do not feel when they lose a child. I am also talking about her cry for help in dealing with that guilt – people do not cry for help unless they need help.

It may well be that she wants that stress out in the open. It may be a great relief to have it exposed so she could see what it is that she is really trying to accomplish by taking on the role that she has. Maybe then she will realise it is not what she really wants to do and be able to relinquish the role and find inner peace.

You cannot ignore these facts when examining the views she puts forth about domestic violence. It is not just about the words that people say but also about the feelings they demonstrate. To only look at part of the story is to be disloyal to the truth and this topic needs to face all of the truth.

Sarah, in Canada there is a law titled "Shout at your wife and loose your house."

>Men and women who shout at their partners risk being thrown out of
>their homes under a sweeping ruling by judges yesterday.

Raising your voice at a husband or wife, or a boyfriend or girlfriend, now counts as domestic violence under the landmark Supreme Court judgment.

The decision also means that denying money to a partner or criticising them can count as violence and bring down draconian domestic violence penalties from the courts.

The Supreme Court made its decision in the case of a woman who left her husband’s council flat and then demanded a new council home.

>She said she left because she had suffered domestic violence – even >though her husband had never harmed her.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350761/Women-entitled-council-house-partner-shouts.

Mr. Mutka alleged, among other matters, that his wife bullied him throughout the marriage and, on one occasion, butt her cigarette out on his person in an argument. His wife denied this treatment with unconfirmed general denials.

What was not in dispute was one particular event where my client was, while sleeping and without provocation, attacked by his wife with a butcher knife. The knife was plunged six inches into his chest.

http://senatorcools.sencanada.ca/speech-in-senate-chamber-senator-cools-proposes-a-series-of-amendments-to-lessen-excessively-punitive-measures-in-the-governments-divorce-bill

My client commenced a divorce proceeding on the basis that the marriage had broken down. His wife counter-petitioned for support and the matter was argued in the Ontario Court General Division in Brampton in November, 1995. The Honourable Mr. Justice McKay, who heard the interlocutory proceedings within the divorce, ordered that my client was to pay spousal support on an interim basis in the amount of $1,500 per month.

I argued, unsuccessfully, that it was not fair that a support order be made under the circumstance that were presented to the court. I argued, unsuccessfully, that it was not fit or just that my client be ordered to pay support to his attacker.

Sarah, I am pleased that you will be working on the issue of elder abuse, as this awful scourge on society has been ignored for too long.
I am presently dealing with some of these problems in my own work.

Domestic violence is at least more out in the open now and we can hopefully keep moving forward despite the many objections from some controlling elements in our society.

I agree VRO's are often not worth the paper they are written on.
Many women are still murdered by their ex or current 'intimate' partners despite these orders.
We need something more concrete. I don't know what that is though.