New York Times
January 8, 2002
Judge's Domestic Violence Ruling Creates an Outcry in
Kentucky
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
EXINGTON, Ky., Jan. 4 - The violent arena of domestic abuse
litigation has grown a bit more volatile here, now that a judge has
decided to hold two women in contempt of court for returning to men
who had been ordered to stay away from them. "You can't have it
both ways," said Judge Megan Lake Thornton of Fayette County
District Court in recently fining two women $100 and $200
respectively for obtaining protective orders forbidding their
partners from contacting them, then relenting and contacting the
men.
Ruling that the order was mutually binding, Judge Thornton also
cited the men for contempt.
"It drives me nuts when people just decide to do whatever they
want," said Judge Thornton, who is experienced in the state's thick
domestic abuse docket, which produces close to 30,000 emergency
protective orders a year. Kentucky officials say there is a virtual
epidemic of abusive relationships in the state.
Judge Thornton's ruling has alarmed advocates for battered
women, who plan to appeal it. The advocates say the finding goes
beyond existing law and is unrealistic because some renewed
contacts often prove unavoidable in domestic abuse cases, which
involve economic and family dependency and other complications of
daily living.
The state office on domestic violence has pointedly agreed,
warning that the ruling could cause abused women to hesitate in
bringing their plight before the courts for fear of being chastised
for their trouble.
"The reality is it's easy to say they should never have
contact," said Sherry Currens, executive director of the Kentucky
Domestic Violence Association, an advocacy and legal protection
group. "But we're talking about people in long-term relationships.
They may have children in common. It's pretty hard to say, `Never
speak again.' People have financial difficulties. They may love the
partner. It's not an easy thing."
But Judge Thornton declared in court, "When these orders are
entered, you don't just do whatever you damn well please and ignore
them."
The ruling stunned Cindra Walker, the lawyer for the two women,
who is with Central Kentucky Legal Services, which represents many
of the thousands of indigent women caught in abusive
relationships.
"For over five years, I've been in court practically every day
on these abuse cases," Ms. Walker said, "and I've never before had
a victim threatened with contempt."
"The domestic violence law is a tool for victims to use to be
safe," not a device to punish them, she said.
One of the women in the ruling said she eventually moved back
with her partner while the other had occasional contacts, Ms.
Walker said.
Judge Thornton's office said judicial rules barred her from
commenting on the cases. But her two rulings made clear that she
expected the original orders against all contact to apply equally
to the person suspected of abuse and the abused.
"They are orders of the court," the judge declared, according to
court transcripts obtained by The Lexington Herald-Leader. "People
are ordered to follow them, and I don't care which side you're
on."
Carol Jordan, the director of the Governor's Office of Child
Abuse and Domestic Violence, said she disagreed with Judge
Thornton's ruling even as she sympathized with the professionals
who must try to oversee violent domestic situations.
"These are tough cases for judges," Ms. Jordan said. "They are
dealing with complex human emotions. They are dealing with
danger."
But if the ruling stands, Ms. Jordan warned, some abused women
will conclude that they will not be treated fairly if they seek
refuge in the courts. This sort of ruling "absolutely increases
abused women's level of risk" by seemingly encouraging their
abusers, Ms. Jordan said.
In Kentucky, as in much of the rest of the nation, abuse victims
have increasingly turned to the courts as protective orders have
become more accepted, said Billie Lee Dunford- Jackson, assistant
director of family violence law and policy for the National Council
of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Most judges "have been making
clear to the batterers that the issue is between the state courts
and them," Ms. Dunford- Jackson said, rather than a domestic issue
between two parties.
A "sizable minority" of judges may still regard the conflicting
parties equally in their rulings, she said, but newer state laws
have increasingly put the focus on violent abuse as the main
problem requiring state intervention.
Ms. Walker's two clients, Jamie Harrison and Robin Hull,
declined to be interviewed. Ms. Walker, one of two legal service
lawyers handling hundreds of abuse cases in 17 counties, said, "Our
big concern now is the chilling effect this will have."
Two years ago, the Kentucky Legislature considered a proposal to
apply the protective orders equally to the accused and the victim,
Ms. Jordan said, but the notion of mutual protection, equating the
two parties, is not part of state law.
Judge Thornton's ruling, she contended, will "establish a
barrier that stops abused women from seeking protection of the
courts."
