Welcome to another week.
A debate in the House of Commons looking at protections for victims of domestic violence will take place on Wednesday 18th July. The Westminster Hall debate will look at the government’s efforts to protect victims of abuse during cross examination in family courts.
This is the summary offered on the Parliament website:
“The Prisons and Courts Bill published in February 2017 contained provisions to prevent perpetrators of domestic violence cross examining their victims in the family court. However, the Bill fell at the General Election in 2017. The Queen’s Speech 2017 confirmed that there would be a draft Domestic Violence and Abuse Bill and also that a Courts Bill would re-introduce measures to prevent alleged abusers cross-examining victims directly.
In March 2018, the Government launched a consultation ‘seeking views on both legislative proposals for a landmark draft Domestic Abuse Bill and a package of practical action.’
In relation to protections in the family courts, the consultation states that new Family Procedure Rules allow vulnerable parties to family proceedings to give evidence behind a protective screen or via video link. It sought views on whether there were other aspects of the criminal court treatment of vulnerable people which the family court could learn from. A draft Domestic Violence Bill is due to be published later this session.
There have been calls for the Government to act more quickly. Women’s Aid and Queen Mary University School of Law published a report in May 2018 which argued that the Government shouldn’t wait for the Domestic Abuse Bill but should use “the quickest legislative vehicle available” and the Victims Commissioner Baroness Newlove has also argued that “time is of the essence”.”
Currently, alleged and convicted offenders of abuse are not allowed to cross examine alleged victims of that abuse in the criminal courts. This automatic presumption does not exist in the family courts.
Our question this week then, is this: do you think the law should be amended to prevent all alleged and proven abusers from cross examining alleged victims in family court?
You can access the full report here.
Researching Reform 
I do not hold politically correct views . For example I agree that rape victims should b given anonymity but I als believe the person accused should have it too until found guilty.anything less is sexual discrimination.
Similarly if a purported victim of abuse can cross examine the accused then the person accused should be ablle to cross examine in turn.
I understand that this could be very distressing face to face so I suggest that such interrogations should take place from behind a screen.
LikeLike
Face to face confrontations between victim and abuser are particularly painful and stressful for the victim – possibly for both, depending on the whether the abuser has any conscience about the alleged offence.
If there is any chance that the victim may be intimidated in any way.shape or form – then the protagonists should be kept separate, but there must be no doubt that all evidence is available to both parties; ensuring justice is done – and seen to be done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Question It! « Musings of a Penpusher
No.
because this closes the door on alleged abusers taking away the right to challenge those making false allegations and is likely to strengthen the position of those making the False allegations.especially when the Family courts fail to request Factual evidence to back up the claims.
LikeLike
Child deaths have had a sharp rise in the past 10 years, statistics show that children over the age of 5 are more likely to be harmed by their fathers that are involved in custody battles and have a known (not necessarily convicted) history of domestic violence.
Your answer totally contradicts itself, our criminal court puts ‘alleged’ victims behind protective screens. At that stage no one has been convicted but it is standard practice.
Family court is not about protecting the ‘alleged’ abusers rights it is about protecting the child. You seem to have missed that focus.
LikeLike
I have missed nothing.
and please remember everyone is entitled to their views and opinions.it just so happens that your view is different from mine.
i stand by what i have said.
LikeLike
Most definitely, I run a women’s support group and the evidence is overwhelming. Women are losing their children to both ‘alleged’ and convicted abusers by the thousands.
Not only have these women been forced to undertake direct cross examination by men who have abused and mentally broken them down (often for years) but they are also forced to sit in the same waiting room as their abusers, often for hours before being called into the court room.
These women are being tortured mentally with subtle stares and intimidation before they have even entered the court room, and even then these women are allowed no support in the form of a family member to enter the court room with them.
This kind of treatment would be considered barbaric in our criminal courts and would be immediately exposed by our press if it happened.
But because of the secrecy of our family courts it is happening on a daily basis in court rooms around our country.
I find it very sad that we treat the mothers of our future in this way. Mothers are quickly becoming the 1 in 10 in this country.
LikeLike
Personally i believe that many help groups out there are fundamentally flawed when it comes to the best interests of the child. groups that only help mothers or only help fathers instantly sets up a adversarial environment that can only make things worse.not forgetting the children are in the middle of that too.
the reality is that all such groups should be helping both parents not just one. Conflict only leads to more conflict. the family courts should be dealing with this as they dont seem to be trained to handle it.
Hence why there are so many victims and justice is rarely ever done.
LikeLike
Typo
the family courts shouldn’t be dealing with this
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike