It’s the appearance of justice. If it got to this point, allegations were made that you did something bad while angry. Whether you did it, or the other partner lied to get you in trouble, the justice system must assume there is a chance that the witness (your partner) was telling the truth and thus you must be punished. This is a way to handle the problem - to close the books on it - by showing that the problem was disposed of in a just manner. You were ordered to anger management, presumably your anger was managed, and if no more reports are made, justice was served. If further reports are made, then the court can justify more severe punishment.
The correct thing to do is to leave your partner. Anyone who rats you out to the “justice” system is either too stupid to be worth staying with (because they ignorantly thought that reporting someone to the police was going to result in a good outcome)
or is actively hostile and you need to separate yourself from them.
I did anger management therapy when I was a kid, and I’ve read up on it since, as I do know I get too angry at times. I can’t imagine any of what I learned to work on people who were forced to go there.
I can see the idea of “if you get anger management classes and show a marked reduction in anger, I’ll waive your sentence.” But it doesn’t sound like it works that way. So it’s absolutely trivial to fake your way through it.
Seems more like a “I’ll give you a warning this time” type of punishment.
Are you seriously suggesting that a woman whose husband is holding her down and beating her should NOT hide in a locked room and call the police for protection?
My suggestion to the woman would be that she complete the anger management and get an attorney and not in that order. If she thinks there is any path that leads to separation or divorce, her compliance is a benefit. If he chooses not to do so, that sends a message to the court as well. Both of them acting like spoiled kids in a serious situation helps no one.
If it actually happens that way, out of the blue, sure. But that’s just not what happens. First of all, if it came to this, probably either he
a. Had a mental break and needs to be hospitalized.
b. gradually became more violent, probably as part of a feedback loop where the violence is being rewarded by her and he is getting favorable outcomes as a result.
in case (a), the people to call are the paramedics. In case b, the thing to do was to leave after the third time or so she mildly got slapped around after an argument, or to attempt therapy conducted without court involvement.
Well, I’ve never personally seen domestic violence, so ok. What I have seen is that it takes 2 to tango - he doesn’t hit her if she isn’t being deliberately antagonizing. It doesn’t start with severe beatings. And weirdly, the women who get an abusive boyfriend and leave tend to move to a new abusive boyfriend. I feel like our culture of making it so that discussing what she did wrong is “victim blaming” and thus it cannot be discussed is problematic. Just like rape victims - yes, ok, they are victims of a crime. But some actions are riskier than others, and we ought to discuss openly which ones those are. As I understand it, isolating oneself with a male acquaintance is enormously risky, possibly riskier than going down alleys in a stripper outfit.
It seems like frank and honest discussions about what generally leads to eventual beatings - not just “the man was evil and it was inevitable” are more productive than “we can’t even talk about it, that’s blaming the victim”. Ditto the situation with a rape - the default zeitgeist seems to be “the man was possessed by Satan, evil, and should be executed. Also, the woman did nothing that increased the risk”.
Point is that it probably didn’t start with “after 2 years together, she burnt his toast. Prior to that, he never hurt a fly. He then beat her severely for 20 minutes with no warning.” Also, she didn’t report the crime until after all the physical evidence of said beating had healed.
The guy probably was a violent asshole from the beginning…
Again, AFAIK ( I was not there ) it was not a “severe beating.” The result was bruises, not anything requiring medical attention. Of course it’s still wrong regardless. She was scared it would go further and called police for protection. Apparently it is the rule here that any domestic violence incident requires the person doing the assault must be taken into custody and charges are mandatory by the arresting officers, whether the victim wants to press charges or not.
Again AFAIK this was the first time their shouting matches have resulted in physical assault.
The two have had many loud shouting fights, and IMHO both should have had anger management, couples counseling and so on long ago.
I’ve also seen it with a sort of deferred adjudication - go to counseling ,etc and in six months we will dismiss the case. But until then, the case is open and still hanging over your head.
However, I'm wondering about the authority of the judge to order the victim into counseling. I cannot see how the judge has the authority to do that in a criminal court case if she wasn't charged with anything ( although it could be done if there were cross-complaints) s Even in a family court case , in my experience , she would have to have a role other than a victim seeking an order of protection for the judge to be able to issue such an order - for example, if there was also a neglect ,custody or visitation proceeding regarding the children.
And just an aside, neither couples counseling nor anger management counseling is generally considered to be appropriate for domestic violence cases.The general standard is to use programs that focus on the abusive partner’s accountability for his or her choice of behavior - so much so that they are usually called something like an “abusive partner accountability program” rather than some sort of counseling.
Absent a man who is a rapist, rape (of a man by a woman) is not possible under any circumstances. Absent a person who is capable of hitting his or her partner, domestic violence is not possible, under any circumstances. I could walk down a dark alley at 2:00 am stark naked and my risk of being raped is zero, without a rapist being present.
The risk comes entirely from the criminals. It is not at all the same thing as engaging in risky behavior like mountain climbing or bungee jumping, where your own actions can have negative consequences.
What generally leads to eventual beatings is a person who is willing to beat his or her partner. There is absolutely nothing done by the victim that leads to being beaten, without another person being willing to use violence.
Because a sitting judge told her to so do. Period. This isn’t something that you get to argue with (absent appealing to the court) - it’s a command.
Now I see why she was being sent. Wow. That’s an incredibly childish response. Whatever her husband has, or has not, done, she’s responsible for her own actions.
See, this? This is a RESPONSIBILITY. That would be all the motivator I’d need to comply.
These two need to - both of them - get their acts together, or things have the potential to become… untidy.
I see you subscribe to the “only some men are criminals, and those are individuals possessed by Satan and who are irredeemably evil” theory of criminality. It’s an easy and mentally lightweight view to have.
Also, you are neglecting what I said entirely. If you go into Mogadishu, Somalia, the risk to your life only comes from the criminal residents of the city - which is basically all of them. But you choose to go there. You didn’t have to buy a planet ticket there. You are partially to blame for what happened.
If he was given a time period in which to complete (he might sneak by if he’s merely started) this therapy, and he shows up to court without it done, one couldn’t be surprised if they apply the handcuffs right then and there. I’m not saying it’s guaranteed to be like that, but not surprising either.