Preparing Evidence for Use as Exhibits at Trials Involving Domestic Violence
Any and all potential evidence should be maintained, organized and useful for trial.
April 07, 2022 at 12:00 PM
10 minute read
No one likes to think they may have to go to trial, especially in a family matter. The fact is that most family cases resolve amicably. Of those that don't settle by agreement and go to trial, many involve issues of domestic violence and/or child abuse. Domestic abuse and child abuse are co-morbid. In other words, even after the adult parties separate due to interpersonal violence, there is a strong connection between perpetrators who batter their partners and those who abuse their children. Therefore, any and all potential evidence should be maintained, organized and useful for trial.
Children are also known to suffer from the battering of their parent even when they themselves are not physically injured. Therefore, in cases involving domestic violence, while not inevitable, a trial is more likely and child protection may be at the heart of the trial. Accordingly, detailed preparation is critical, especially for victims where there are children in need of protection. Attorneys need to be prepared, and they must prepare their clients. Documentary evidence assists the trier of fact. It can shine a light on the credibility of the victim and therefore the child's need for protection. In doing so, it can also cast doubt on the credibility of the abuser.
Trial preparation begins with knowing the victim client's detailed relationship history with their adult abusive partner. The client should write the history of the relationship, describing not only the physical violence, but what incidents or behaviors lead up to the violence regarding each incident. This history should go back to the relationship before the marriage as that is often where coercion and threats begin even before physical violence has been used as a means of control. In cases of emotional abuse without physical violence, the history should also be written. Details such as name calling, humiliation, labeling followed by apologizing, and gas-lighting behaviors, as well as how an argument started, are important to contextualize events. That history is a critical guide. It is a guide for pretrial and a guide for a trial where the well-being of children is at issue. That evidence is the telling of the story of how the violence began, escalated, continued, and why the matter requires a court to intervene and protect.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDecision of the Day: District Judge Vacates Magistrate's Ruling to Disqualify Prosecutors in Kidnapping Case
Decision of the Day: Judge Precludes Ballistics Expert's Opinion on Scene for 2016 Fatal Police Shooting
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250