Judge Janice Martin
“Why Do Batterers Kill Their Partners/Spouses”
Audio Conference, Battered Women’s Justice Project
November 13, 2008
(Transcript Edited for Publication)

As a judge, when I assess lethality, my assessment is only as effective as the information that I receive. We know from the research by Jackie Campbell and David Adams that forced sex is a key indicator of escalating violence and potential lethality. It is critical to have trained domestic violence prosecutors and victim advocates assigned to domestic violence cases, so that thorough and appropriate interviews are conducted with the victims. Victims are often more reluctant to discuss sexual abuse, or assault, and the horrific details connected thereto, and the experience of the interviewer along with appropriate questions are key in eliciting information relevant to risk assessment.

I have an expectation in my courtroom of lots of information, so attorneys, victim advocates, prosecutors, pre-trial people know that when they come into my courtroom, I am going to demand and expect information. Now, obviously, information, in terms of its availability, differs from arraignment to pretrial. But even at arraignment, I mandate that the prosecutors appear early, that the pretrial people do record checks, not only of state records, but also of the National Crime Information Center, Department of Transportation, which goes to DUIs. DUI history may shed light on irrational behavior, the escalating type of wild behavior where a person is driving drunk with the children in the back, or takes the family hostage driving 85 miles an hour. All those things would show up. In addition, I insist that prior to arraignment and at arraignment prosecutors have available for me court records that are not necessarily in the criminal court. That would mean the family court file, Domestic Violence Orders, Emergency Protection Orders, Emergency Custody Orders. So all of that information is required.

At pretrial, additional information is required. I also insist that a victim be interviewed by a victim advocate and a prosecutor. In addition, I want questions asked about prior incidents that may not have resulted in criminal charges, but police runs, or incidents. I also want to know how many times that victim has left the home, or fled for safety, or removed her children for safety, or if there have been relatives in that household who have left because of the violence in the household.

And then I go through a checklist – all of you are probably aware of the checklist – but I like Jackie Campbell’s checklist. I want to know about the escalation of violence, whether there’s access to weapons. I want to know about the nature of the violence, if it includes strangulation, forced sex, guns, if there are drugs, alcohol, specificity of threats. When people start talking about, “I have a bullet with your name on it,” or they talk specifically as to how they plan to kill the victim, maybe chopping someone up, putting them in a freezer. Other warning signs I need to know about are stalking and increasingly controlling behavior, attempts to commit suicide, threats to pets, relatives, family members, mother or father or children. Threats to pets are very telling to me. I want information about different relationships that the prosecutors and advocates are aware of. I am insistent upon having all of this information pretrial because it’s important to me to draft appropriate orders. And my orders are only as good as the information that I receive.

I also think that it’s important for judges, at the very beginning, to assert control because batterers have obviously been asserting control. I make it very clear in my courtroom that now I am in control. I can sort of turn the table on the defendant, and say, “You thought you were through with me? Well, no, because you’re coming back for compliance review. I am extremely invested in this case and you will be seeing me frequently and often to insure compliance with my court orders.”

That’s also very important for the victim to know: that the dynamics of the relationship have changed. It’s not power and control between batterer and victim. The judge has control. Now, in saying that, though, we also have to appreciate victim autonomy and we also have to defer to victims at times because they clearly have an insight into that batterer’s behavior. And they clearly have to be listened to as relates to issues of lethality. In discussing all of this and obtaining information I am always constantly checking with the prosecutor and the victim advocate about safety planning, whether it’s been modified based upon changes, escalation in the defendant’s behavior, modification in his behavior. Not publicly in front of the defendant, obviously, but getting some assurance that someone is working with the victim on that issue.

I am a strong proponent of compliance reviews. I think that that’s critical. Not all cases have to have them, but you have a clear indication of which cases require them, to make sure that all of your court orders are being complied with, that there’s no violation of the no-contact order, that there’s attendance at the batterer’s intervention program. I have a court staff that monitors all of my defendants and they send me immediate notice of non-attendance, non-compliance. And I will redocket that case immediately, and the jail will redocket that case immediately, for noncompliance. I think it’s very appropriate to have that defendant come back to court at regularly scheduled intervals so that we can discuss compliance with court orders.

Two other things that I have encountered. Often at arraignment or bail hearings, an employer or a minister shows up. The employer wants to tell me what a valuable employee this defendant is and how he is necessary at their jobsite, how he’s involved in some special project, and of course, support of the family is needed and he is the sole provider. And oftentimes I have the victim who comes in and says, “Judge Martin, can he have work release?” Well, I’m very sensitive to that issue but that victim’s safety is paramount. And that’s one of the things I have to consider, with lethality. So if I’m going to be assessing the risk, work release can be a risk to victims. So when I do work release, I have been very creative. If the employers come in and want their employee released, I ask them just how valuable that employee is, and what are they doing to assure me that there will be compliance with my court order and if they can assure me that this defendant will stay away from the victim. And then they give me this very confused look, like “Well, what do you mean?” My response to them is, if you want that employee there, are you willing to provide transportation? Are you willing to sign an agreement that that employee will never leave the worksite, on breaks, on lunch, he will come to and from the worksite directly from the jail, and you will sign an agreement similar to a personal assurity bond, which holds you accountable and responsible and liable to the court, if there are any breaches?

Believe it or not, I’ve had some employers who have signed those documents. Those documents are also signed by the defendant, and the jail signs off on it. I had one encounter where a defendant was the son of an attorney. And she happened to be a prosecutor in another county, and she wanted her son released for work release. I assured her that was possible if she assured me that she would provide transportation, if the employer would sign the agreement that the defendant would not leave the worksite, he would be supervised while at work, and that he signed an agreement with the jail that those were the conditions that he was going to live up to. Worked like a charm. And everyone in the courtroom thought, “This is so cumbersome, how’s this going to work.” Well, you know when people want to do things, you can get it done.

I also address assignment of wages. One concern is that the defendant provide for his family. We execute a wage assignment immediately, in the presence of the employer, so that the victim receives child support. And we address maintenance of household expenses, so that the electricity is not cut off and pipes frozen in the winter. So, when employers come into my courtroom, I get them involved in ways that they clearly did not anticipate. But, I have found it to be effective, in certain cases, particularly when you have employers who are very, very interested in the employee getting back to work. And these are usually employers who have had the employee working for them for a long period of time; there’s a relationship, and they are willing to go out on this limb. It certainly provides me with assurance that there’s going to be some safety concerns addressed and that my victim is not in as much danger as if there was unsupervised work release.

Ministers present a different story. Often, when someone gets in trouble, he brings in the whole kitchen sink: first grade teacher, priest, minister, schoolteacher – you know, everyone wants to talk about how this defendant poses no risk. I have had to be very stern and say, look, if you wish to assist, then you can assure me, perhaps, that this person continues to pay his child support. You can assure me if you’re a faith-based organization, you have specific, identified services available to help the children or the family of the defendant. And, keep in mind, help is not going to be predicated upon your having a conversation with the victim about the release of the defendant. In fact, you are prohibited from engaging in conversations with the victim about that topic.

I have been a little creative in doing some things on the bench, but obviously when I consider bail release, or probation, or release for a defendant, even if it’s for work release, I have to consider safety of the victim, safety of the community. I also have to be concerned about the likelihood that he will reoffend. So I’m going to put measures in place that satisfy me.

Judge Janice Martin, Why Do Batterers Kill Their Partners/Spouses?, BATTERED WOMEN'S JUSTICE PROJECT AUDIOCONFERENCE, Transcript Edited for Publication, November 13, 2008.