Domestic Violence

Front 1

Stalking

Back 1

A pattern of repeated and unwanted attention, harassment, contact, or any other course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear.

Hint 1

Ex. Assaulting the victim, violating protective orders, sexually assaulting the victim, vandalizing the victim’s property, burglarizing the victim’s home or otherwise stealing from the victim, killing the victim’s petThreat (i.e delivering dead animals to doorstep of victim or pointing finger at someone signifying they want to shoot them)Harassment: (i.e unsolicited letters, unsolicited phone calls, leaving unwanted items for the victim)Following the victim: Perpetrator stands outside workplace or home, spying, while having no business being there

Front 2

What precipitated stalking laws and where did this occur?

Back 2

In 1990, California became the first state to pass an anti-stalking law after the murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer. Following, in a short period of time all 50 states have followed up. On July 25, 1996, the United States senate passed the Interstate Stalking Punishment and Prevention act.

Front 3

Relationship or simple obsessional stalkers

Back 3

The perpetrator most likely had been in a prior relationship with the victim. The word choice of simple is not to discredit the severity of the abuse, but more so to classify these individual as the most common type of stalker.

Hint 3

Emotionally immature, socially incompetent, unable to maintain relationships, overly jealous, insecure, and low in self esteem.

Front 4

Love obsessional stalkers

Back 4

These types of perpetrators usually target celebrities and/or politicians.

Hint 4

They often invent fantasies despite the nonexistent relationship and will go for lethal means to achieve it; there is little to no care if the attention they receive is positive or negative- making them very dangerous.

Front 5

Erotomania

Back 5

Usually associated with a stalker who has severe mental problems, including delusions. Opposed to the love obsessional stalker, the erotomaniac may actually believe the victim knows and/or loves him/her.

Hint 5

These types of stalkers may follow victims for long periods of time. Although it is rare, erotomaniacs may target public figures (i.e celebrities, politicians, etc).

Front 6

Vengeance and terrorism stalker

Back 6

These stalkers seek to “punish” the victims for what they perceive they did wrong.

Hint 6

Individuals who seek vengeance on employers after being fired, or antiabortionists who stalk doctors who participate in abortion practices.

Front 7

Stalking

Back 7

A pattern of repeated and unwanted attention, harassment or contact that would cause a person to feel fear through a series of actions.

Front 8

Homicide

Back 8

The killing of another human being.

Front 9

Intimate Partner Violence

Back 9

The killing of a spouse, ex-spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend.

Front 10

Justifiable Homicide

Back 10

Killing with no evil or criminal intent. The person committing the homicide is not at fault therefore deemed an act as self-defense.

Hint 10

Ex. Carrying out the death sentence of an inmate or killing during combat

Front 11

Excusable Homicide

Back 11

Homicide committed accidentally. Perceived as wrong but tolerated due to the person’s state of mind.

Hint 11

Killing an attacker after being assaulted in a parking lot without using a dangerous weapon or kill in a cruel and unusual way.

Front 12

Felonious Homicide

Back 12

the wrongful killing of a human being (with malice intent).

Front 13

What are lethality assessments?

Back 13

A.k.a. Risk Assessment- is a tool used to determine if an offender is at risk for future offending by classifying individuals into high and low risk categories. It has been tested (by CJ professionals) and found to be a good predictor of offender recidivism. It consists of a 20 question interview that could be administered by practitioners with some training.

Front 14

The use of the self-defense argument to include its use when a victim kills/assaults their batterer (battered persons syndrome); what is it?

Back 14

Classified as an excusable homicide in which the victim has suffered constant violence and has been battered to the point where it pushes the victim to kill their oppressor. However, the law does not recognize The Battered Wife Syndrome as a defense

Front 15

Protective Order Confidentially

Back 15

Survivors of IPV demand that his or her name, number and address not be part of the public record when filing for a court order of protection which is called ___________

Hint 15

Confidentiality from the courts is standard procedure for those who fear for their safety

Front 16

Driver’s Privacy Protection Act

Back 16

Became effective Sept 13, 1997. Under this act, personal information from the driver’s license can be disclosed only to certain categories of requesters.

Front 17

Address Confidentiality Programs (ACPs)

Back 17

Provides victims of domestic violence with a legal substitute address to prevent their perpetrators from using public record to track down.

Front 18

Protective order

Back 18

Allows certain victims of domestic violence to receive protection and some kinds of relief

Hint 18

Those who are eligible for protective orders have to be current and former spouses, cohabitants for 90 days, person related to the respondent by blood, marriage or adoption, parents/stepparent/stepchild (under circumstances), vulnerable adults, person who has had a child with the respondent

Front 19

Peace order

Back 19

Provides protection to people experiencing certain kinds of abuse who are not eligible for protective orders

Hint 19

Those who are eligible for peace orders must be within 30 days of the act and the petitioner must show that the act occurred and that it is likely to occur again

Front 20

Interim protective orders

Back 20

If you are in immediate danger of abuse and the court is closed you may get an interim order by going to the nearest district court commissioner. An interim order goes into effect once the respondent is served by a law enforcement officer. The interim order lasts until a judge holds a temporary hearing.

Front 21

Temporary (ex parte) protective orders

Back 21

This can be done ex parte, but is done before a judge. The abuser is notified of the order against him as soon as it is issued. The temporary orders in effect for 7 days at which point a full court hearing will be held for final

Front 22

Permanent order

Back 22

An order can be permanent (last forever) if you had a prior order against him/her in the past and the s/he is convicted and serves at least 5 years in prison for an incident of abuse against you that was the basis for your prior order -- now, if you request a new protective order, this new order can be permanent.

Front 23

Final Protective order

Back 23

Can be issued only after both sides have the opportunity to present their evidence and testimony at a full court hearing. If the judge believes that the abuse has occurred, or if the respondent consents to the you getting the protective order, the judge will grant a final protective order

Front 24

Mincey v. Arizona

Back 24

Police must obtain a warrant before searching a murder scene, with the exception of searching the scene for more possible victims.

Front 25

Crawford v. Washington

Back 25

Held that “testimonial” out of court statements inadmissible if the accused did not have the opportunity to cross examine that accuser. Testimonial is a legal term of art: any statements that an objectively reasonable person in the declarant situation would have deemed likely to be used in court.

Hint 25

Example: a declarant made a statement to a police officer, and then that officer testifies about that statement at trial.

Front 26

Giles v. California (2008)

Back 26

When offering hearsay statements by an unavailable declarant under the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” doctrine, the state must establish not only that the defendant caused the absence of the declarant, but acted with the specific intent of keeping the witness from testifying.

Front 27

Davis v. Washington

Back 27

The supreme court ruled that the statements to the 911 operator were not “testimonial” (formal statement), therefore admissible as evidence

Hint 27

Davis rationale: The 911 call was not to establish or prove past facts, but to describe circumstances requiring police assistance. The caller spoke about events as they were actually occurring while facing an ongoing emergency, rather than describing past events.The statements were necessary to resolve the emergency rather than to investigate events.

Front 28

Hammon v. Indiana

Back 28

The statements of an alleged victim made in response to an officer's questions in a room away from defendant when there was no immediate threat to her person, the supreme court ruled that the statements were “testimonial”, making them subject to the 6th Amendment.

Hint 28

(keyword: alleged victim making statement in a safe space)