Abused, then accused


My colleague Kristen V. Brown had a story in Sunday’s paper on how victims of domestic violence sometimes are charged criminally, often more harshly than their abusers.

Brown cites the story of one Albany woman who says she grabbed a hammer after her boyfriend abused her, resulting in her being charged with criminal possession of a weapon, menacing and endangering the welfare of a child.

From Kristen’s story:

Nesmith counts herself as a victim of domestic abuse, one of the many who advocates say are caught in the criminal justice system as defendants — in some cases while their accused abusers face lesser charges or no charges at all. The issue is one that has long been recognized among domestic abuse victim advocates, such as Equinox, an Albany non-profit community organization that helped Nesmith fight her case in court. Seemingly little, though, has been done to address the issue.

State legislation introduced in 2011 aimed at aiding some of these women has failed to gain enough support for a vote; this year the bill is likely to again languish in committee.

Some women, such as Nesmith, are arrested and criminally charged for defending themselves against an abuser’s alleged attacks. Others become defendants after striking back for what they say are years of abuse, or for participating in crimes such as burglaries or drug deals at the behest of a controlling partner.

Read the full story here.


Categories: General
Bryan Fitzgerald

2 Responses

  1. Bamster says:

    I don’t get the point of this story. Of course the abuser gets arrested when she fights back. It’s the same system that doesn’t allow you to defend yourself with a gun in your home. NY has setup a ridiculous set of laws protecting criminals’ rights where you are expected to take a beating, robbing, or worse and let the police handle it even though they may be 45 minutes away.

  2. Jango Davis says:

    Bamster: Please provide specific details as to which “criminal rights” you are referring to?

    Can you cite a specific law? No, of course not. There is NOTHING in the SAFE Act that prevents you from owning a handgun or a shotgun, or any number of rifles. So, try at least to keep your fear-mongering down to those of yoru friends who are prone to believing bipolar outbursts as fact.

    But yes, I would say that anyone who tries to sell a gun without a background check or registration is aiding and abetting criminal access to weapons and is working against the public good. People like that are as bad as the criminals themselves.