Thursday, September 11, 2014
Political Mayhem Thursday: Ray Rice and Criminal Law
For those of you that have missed the whole drama, Ray Rice is a pro football player, who was a star running back at Rutgers and then for the Baltimore Ravens. In the NFL, he gained over 1,000 yards for four consecutive years.
This past February, Rice got in a fight with his fiancé at the now-closed Revel Casino in Atlantic City. He knocked her unconscious with a punch, and then dragged her out of an elevator. Charges were brought, but later dropped when he agreed to attend counseling. The NFL imposed a two-game suspension, which was controversial. This past week, a video surfaced of the incident which showed the full violence of it, and Rice was cut from the team.
Much attention has been given to the NFL's light initial punishment here, but I think the more important and perhaps more troubling aspect is the law enforcement response. Shouldn't he have been tagged with a crime for such a violent act?
One complicating factor is that the victim, now his wife, did not want him sanctioned severely by the law or by the NFL. She, of course, had a personal and a financial interest in Rice keeping his job. Her role reminds me of the deeply troubling incident at Baylor involving basketball star Lacedarious Dunn. His girlfriend ended up in the hospital with a broken jaw after an encounter with him, and afterwards she and her father told different stories to explain the incident away (allowing him to finish his college career and try for the pros). It was explained in some quarters that Dunn's girlfriend "refused to press charges." It's still unclear what really happened.
Let me make something clear: The victim of a crime does not have a veto over the prosecutor's charging decisions, and should not have that power, even as the prosecutor has a duty to consider the views and safety of the victim. The prosecutor's duty is not only to that victim but to possible future victims of the same person. It is awkward and uncomfortable to subpoena a victim and force them to testify under threat of perjury, but the failure to do so in some cases will mean that the harm we are charged with preventing will recur.
The relationship between victims and prosecutors is often troubled, a fact that is sometimes hidden from public view.
In the Rice case, should prosecutors have deferred to what the victim wanted?
Comments:
<< Home
Most women in a domestic violence situation fear for their lives. Going through the system is too risky because a failed conviction might leave them more exposed.
An extremely complex situation that I have to deal with every day in representing clients charged with domestic violence. It seems no matter what anyone has to say about domestic violence, people will react with anger that they "just don't get it." I wouldn't even normally jump into the fray, (and certainly wouldn't in a more public forum like facebook) but the community on this blog values dialogue more than most.
Obviously victims never deserve this, and any reasonable person would agree that a man should never put his hands on a woman. It is just wrong, and the dynamic of power and control that goes with it is what makes it so tragic. That being said, I do think prosecutors have to at least listen and take into account the victims' wishes. Our instinct is to protect them from their attackers, but in many cases they choose to continue a life with them. There is the psychology of being a victim, and the cycle of domestic violence that is at play, but we don't go home with them. Attorneys aren't there in 30 or 60 days when the attacker gets out of jail, goes home to the mother of his children, and tries to continue on.
This is also complicated by the fact that many, many, many people use this system as a weapon when no violence occurs. False allegations are thrown around like candy, and you can bet that a found text message or voicemail from a cheating spouse or significant other lends itself to the anger producing the false allegations. That doesn't take anything away from the real victims, only makes it harder to sort through all the filth.
How blessed are those of us who had the example of two parents where physical violence was never a solution. It makes me sad to think that many saw their parents (or whatever domestic situation was reality) doing the same things they are now engaged in. It doesn't make it right, but it makes you wonder about the example of "love" that was given them.
Obviously victims never deserve this, and any reasonable person would agree that a man should never put his hands on a woman. It is just wrong, and the dynamic of power and control that goes with it is what makes it so tragic. That being said, I do think prosecutors have to at least listen and take into account the victims' wishes. Our instinct is to protect them from their attackers, but in many cases they choose to continue a life with them. There is the psychology of being a victim, and the cycle of domestic violence that is at play, but we don't go home with them. Attorneys aren't there in 30 or 60 days when the attacker gets out of jail, goes home to the mother of his children, and tries to continue on.
This is also complicated by the fact that many, many, many people use this system as a weapon when no violence occurs. False allegations are thrown around like candy, and you can bet that a found text message or voicemail from a cheating spouse or significant other lends itself to the anger producing the false allegations. That doesn't take anything away from the real victims, only makes it harder to sort through all the filth.
How blessed are those of us who had the example of two parents where physical violence was never a solution. It makes me sad to think that many saw their parents (or whatever domestic situation was reality) doing the same things they are now engaged in. It doesn't make it right, but it makes you wonder about the example of "love" that was given them.
Megan, that's a good point, but the hard part is coming up with a way to address that while still doing the right thing through the legal system.
There was some evidence that, until that last punch, the woman was also slugging him. How would our analysis differ if she hit him first? I have had one divorce case where witnesses said she was the violent one and he merely was defending himself.
# posted by 
: 11:36 AM
: 11:36 AM
Good discussion of exactly this at the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/09/10/going-after-abusers-like-nfl-player-ray-rice?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=Moth-Visible&module=inside-nyt-region®ion=inside-nyt-region&WT.nav=inside-nyt-region
Post a Comment
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/09/10/going-after-abusers-like-nfl-player-ray-rice?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=Moth-Visible&module=inside-nyt-region®ion=inside-nyt-region&WT.nav=inside-nyt-region
<< Home
