Recent Accomplishments
DV LEAP receives a fabulous opinion about civil protection orders from the D.C. Court of Appeals! (July 2008)
This case concerned a woman who was beaten viciously beaten by her boyfriend at a party at his house, after she got upset with him. The trial court found the man guilty of assault and criminally convicted him, but the judge repeatedly blamed the woman for "provoking" the violence and "bringing it on herself." The court entered mutual civil protection orders-- one against each party. DV LEAP co-counseled the amicus brief with a talented and dedicated team from Mintz Levin and placed the case with top-notch attorneys from Crowell & Moring. DV LEAP's amicus brief was essentially a primer on the reform purposes of the civl protection order statute, and how many courts re-victimize victims of domestic violence by blaming them for the violence. DV LEAP's brief ends by explaining that this kind of hostility to victims is common, and asked the D.C. Court of Appeals to "send a message to the lower courts that civil protection orders should further protection of victims and accountability of perpetrators for unlawful violence." On July 3, 2008, the D.C. Court of Appeals issued a powerful decision that sends exactly this kind of message to the lower courts.
DV LEAP is gratified that the D.C. Court of Appeals held that a court may not enter a CPO against a victim of abuse in order to "protect her from herself" or to punish someone who "provokes" the violence. Rather, courts must enter CPO's based on the purposes of the statute which is to protect those in danger of future violations. DV LEAP is especially pleased that the Court of Appeals recognized that a mutual CPO "shifts the responsibility for the abuse onto the victim and does not hold the abuser accountable." Also of great importance is the fact that the D.C. Court of Appeals emphasized that the civil protection order process and criminal prosecutions serve distinct purposes and a victim should not be penalized or blamed for pursuing a CPO as well as criminal prosecution.
Read the full court opinion.
DV LEAP's Executive Director's Letter to the Editor "Why This Mother Was Not Heard" is published by the Washington Post! (April 2008)
To read Joan Meier's Letter to the Editor, please click on the following link.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/11/AR2008041103152.html
DV LEAP's groundbreaking Symposium "Bringing a Custody and Abuse Case to the Supreme Court" is a huge success!!! (December 2007)
Throughout the country, battered mothers and children have been subjected to unjust court processes that have violated their most basic due process rights. For example, battered mothers have had their children taken away from them by courts with little or no notice or opportunity to be heard and have been punished for trying to protect their children. Because the problems are so widespread and state courts are failing to respond, DV LEAP and other leaders in the field have become convinced that this problem must be brought to the Supreme Court. In December, 2007, DV LEAP and George Washington University School of Law hosted a Symposium that brought together leading Supreme Court laywers with domestic violence and child custody experts. The Symposium was a unique opportunity to educate domestic violence lawyers and Supreme Court litigators on ways of increasing the chances of getting one of these cases up to the Supreme Court. DV LEAP will publish Best Practices arising from the Symposium in the coming months.
DV LEAP wins a major victory for victims of domestic violence and their abused children in the D.C. Court of Appeals! (July 2007)
DV LEAP represented a mother that a court had previously found had been subjected to a pattern of severe domestic violence. After the divorce, her young daughter complained of sexual abuse after visits with her father. DV LEAP co-counseled the trial with a dedicated team from Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver and Jacobson, LLP, ensured that a top-notch psychological expert was brought in, and extensively challenged the court’s forensic evaluator who had expressed skepticism about the child’s complaints of abuse. Nonetheless, in December 2005, the court ruled that there was “insufficient evidence” of sexual abuse, although the “sheer number” of complaints by the child were “cause for concern.” The court ordered unsupervised visitation to re-commence, but eliminated overnights. On July 19th, 2007 a unanimous panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals issued a lengthy and thorough opinion that powerfully vindicated DV LEAP’s position in this case and will be extremely important for future victims of domestic violence in custody and abuse cases in D.C. Most importantly: the Court held emphatically that children’s safety is always the priority in cases concerning abuse. In particular, the Court held that under D.C.'s statute, "a history of domestic abuse will always be relevant at every custody or visitation proceeding in which the abuser is involved" - something which had been hotly contested by the opposing party. The Court also expressly affirmed that the burden is on the abuser to demonstrate the child's safety in visitation. Finally, the Court also affirmed that "a parent's commission of an intrafamily offense could impact the custody decision and result in a limitation on parental visitation rights. . . and [that] intrafamily offenses result in both emotional and physical harm to children."
Read the full court opinon.