The prevalence of Domestic Violence in Arizona is astounding and indicates a need for additional reform to the criminal justice system, despite decades of changes that have already been made. Every 44 minutes in Arizona, a child witnesses a domestic violence incident, and every year there are over 100 fatalities associated with domestic violence (AZCADV). These statistics indicate a need for change to the criminal justice system, but the challenge is to locate the specific changes that need to be made and at what level. Not only are the high incidence rates an indication of a problem, but also the high recidivism rates among offenders. The recidivism rates indicate a need to examine domestic violence policy at not only the level in which there is reactive policing and sentencing, i.e. repeat offender and any court monitored programs, but also proactive policing, including the initial contact between law enforcement and domestic violence victims and offenders. Given the lack of information on repeat offenders, it is difficult to track at which part in the process there is a breakdown. There are multiple aspects and agencies involved with a domestic violence case, therefore the areas to examine for necessary reform are nearly never ending. What needs to be examined are the most prevalent and impacting parts of a domestic violence case. This will include a look at mandatory arrest policies, and the crucial first contacts that officers have with offenders which greatly effect the end result. Victim advocate programs must be looked at, as they have proven crucial to working with victims during the court process and allowing courts to prosecute offenders. Lastly, court services programs that mostly include offender rehabilitation programs, and victim shelters must be looked at, as both of these have an impact on recidivism rates. The current efforts and policies implemented by the criminal justice system to combat domestic violence have not proven to be sufficient in reducing the continuously present crime.
Law enforcement's role in domestic violence is one of the most crucial aspects to preventing and combating the crime. From the first 911 call that is made to the first officer contact with the victim and suspect, the handling of the incident is crucial to future prosecution. A major part of these initial contacts and perhaps the most effective and widely used measure is what is referred to as mandatory arrest. Arizona is one of many states that have passed a mandatory arrest statute. Unlike a non-domestic related assault, the statute indicates that an officer shall arrest a suspect if probable cause exists, thus eliminating any discretion on the officers part. This can be shown in Arizona Revised Statues, 13-3601 here:
"In cases of domestic violence involving the infliction of physical injury or involving the discharge, use or threatening exhibition of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, the peace officer shall arrest a person, with or without a warrant, if the officer has probable cause to believe that the offense has been committed and the officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed the offense, whether the offense was committed within or without the presence of the peace officer, unless the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the circumstances at the time are such that the victim will be protected from further injury." (ARS 13-3601).
The institution of mandatory arrest is overall favored among police officers and has lead to higher rates of convictions (System Alert). The follow-up question that needs to be studied further is whether mandatory arrest is truly a deterrent to repeat offenders. Right now the indication is that it does not reduce future calls for the same parties. Several officers in the Morrison Institute study "System Alert", agree that mandatory arrest has no effect on whether or not an offender will re-often, but rather just how soon. The majority of officers in Arizona agree that mandatory arrest at the very least resolves the issue for the night, and prevents multiple calls during one shift (Morrison Institute). So while the statute ensures that an offender will be arrested when probable cause exists, it does not ensure that the offender will be convicted of the crime, which will be covered later. In my interview with a Phoenix Police domestic violence detective, she gave an example of how the mandatory arrest policy can be effective, even if it does not lead to prosecution: "I agree with the mandatory arrest policy because most of the time victims won't follow through with the prosecution, and that jail time that the suspect gets at the arrest is the only time that they'll get" (Taylor).
In a study among Arizona domestic violence victims, 68% said that officers enforcing laws more strictly would have an impact to reduce domestic violence (Morrison Institute Forum 411). This indicates that victims are also an advocate for the mandatory arrest policy. The policies within each police department must also include a strict enforcement of state law, ensuring that the mandatory arrest method is appropriately used when applicable. Given the massive role that law enforcement plays, it is a departmental responsibility to ensure proper handling of domestic violence cases. In Phoenix, there is an entire division of detectives assigned to domestic violence cases, and the methods used are backed by research and success rates to ensure the most effective policing is being used. It is up to local police departments to ensure that officers and detectives, whom may not be experts on a domestic violence, get the proper training that go beyond just Arizona State Law, and addresses coercive behaviors and underlying issues that are associated with each case. This can be done through the local Coalition for Domestic violence at the state level. The importance of law enforcement in domestic violence is arguably the most crucial part and can have an impact on virtually every aspect of the case and victim/offender relationship. Despite state laws that allow a police department to arrest an offender, there must be proper training and policies in place within both a police department and the subsequent victim service programs. Because of the complexity of the crime, the justice system must change their approach and avoid treating the cases in a systematic manner. Since the police department is such a crucial part of the process, it is vital that officers and detectives have proper training Detective Taylor with the Phoenix Police Department's Domestic Violence Unit, gives an example of the lack of essential training among patrol officers: "There is brief training given to officers during the academy; however, it does not address things like the cycle of violence that is typical in a DV relationship, or the social theories that explain victim behavior" (Taylor). Without this training, there may be parts of an investigation that are compromised because certain evidence (i.e. photographs of victim) was not included. Officers also may discount or downplay victims stories or believe a suspect because of their lack of understanding of the deceptive behaviors that are present in a domestic violence relationship. Without additional training about victim psychology, there will continue to be a lack of understanding that creates barriers between the officers and victims. In a survey, over 85 percent of officers agreed, strongly agree, or neither agreed or disagree with the statement "Many DV victims could easily leave their relationships, but down." (Layers of Meaning 36). This statistic clearly shows an issue with the attitude of officers when it comes to domestic violence. Detective Taylor responded to this statistic saying, "That's just officer's ignorance, because the victim is never responsible, the actual violent act ultimately comes down to the offenders actions." Overall there is no doubt as to whether or not officers need more training.
Although the Phoenix Police Department has made large strides in responding to domestic violence, there still are issues at the officer level during first contacts. The first step to improve the response to this crime begins with additional training. The Arizona justice system has implemented various programs, laws, and policies that assist both victims, and suspects via offender rehabilitation programs. The most effective and useful tools have are ones that involve victim assistance programs. The two most direct ways implemented to help victims are victim advocacy groups, and orders of protection, which are issued through the court. Victim advocate groups are essential on almost every level of the judicial process. One of the most common issues that exist is a lack of victim willingness to cooperate with officers and prosecutors (System Alert 28). Without this cooperation, the case generally goes nowhere. Officer Taylor explains how imperative it is for victim cooperation: "When I go to court and the victim shows up, we have a huge success rate. Just getting the victim to show up is so important. While the reasons for a lack of victim cooperation are infinite, much of it comes down to a lack of education. Victims simply are not aware of the resources available, and the ways in which offenders coercively control them. By using victim advocates, victims are provided with the education and resources to help them not only leave their relationship, but successfully prosecute the offender. Detective Taylor explains that because of a tremendous amount of cases that detectives work with, they simply do not have time to perform the duties of advocates. The other major part of the judicial system is orders of protection. An order of protection is a court ordered mandate that victims can receive at no cost, which puts in place restrictions on offenders. These restrictions can vary from no telephone contact with the victim, not being within a certain distance, and weapon removal in the suspects home. Although an order of protection is one of the most recommended resources for victims, studies suggest that officers disagree with the overall premise of them. Much of this comes down to a misunderstanding among victims, such as the belief that when an order of protection is in place, they are safe and the offender will not break it. Because of the very nature of domestic violence suspects, they often have no problem with going to jail, and very commonly violate an order. Detective Taylor stated, "An order of protection is a piece of paper, and it doesn't really protect anybody, people break the law all the time." The overall opinion of police officers suggests that protection orders have not contributed to a decrease in repeat domestic violence cases, despite the systems portrayal of this (Layers of Meaning 34).
Another very common solution put forth by the court system, is an offender rehabilitation program. Domestic violence suspects are often sentenced to attend these programs either as a plea bargain or after being convicted of a DV related crime. In an interview with Detective Taylor, she stated "Offender treatment programs just don't work, the stats are astronomically high, something like 97% percent of offenders will re-offend within one year after completion of the classes." This gives an idea of how well these programs work, and points out a major flaw in the system. Even if all of the other laws and policies currently in place work as they are supposed to, and a suspect is charged and sentenced to an offender treatment program, this has no benefit for any party involved. Not the suspect, or the victim, who will likely be re-victimized by the same offender even after all of their successful prosecution. This shows a need for major change within these programs, and additional studies need to be done to identify where they are going wrong and if it is even worth sentencing suspects to attend these programs.
Several policy changes can be implemented to improve the many findings and issues that have come up. Despite many changes already being made, more can be done to help victims. This can be done by ensuring that every municipality, regardless of how small, give their victims access to advocates. This will help at every level, from the first officer contact, to prosecution, to the use of domestic violence shelter. The portrayal of orders of protection as a guaranteed defense against an abuse needs to be changed. Despite the many benefits to an order of protection, the attitudes of officers demonstrate a need for reform. There also need to be additional studies that can truly show the effectiveness of an order of protection. The mandatory arrest policy has not proven to be insufficient; hover, there needs to be additional studies performed relating specifically to its effectiveness within the state of Arizona and subsequently making changes based on the results. Although the state of Arizona was proactive in implementing the mandatory arrest law in the 1980's, they have since failed to adequately follow up on the effectiveness. This is seen through the very high number of repeat cases. Officers agree that offender treatment programs are nothing more than an illusion of offender rehabilitation and the statistics back these claims up. Overall, the general theme for any kind of reform is the need for additional research and implementation on all fronts of the judicial process.
Works Cited
Arizona Revised Statutes, ยงยง 13-3601 - 13-3602 (State of Arizona 2007). Web.
"Domestic Violence Information -." Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Web. 17 Feb. 2010.
Risk Management: Assesing Domestic Violence Suspects Arrested in Phoenix. Tempe: Morrison
Institute for Public Policy, 2009. Print.
Taylor, Deborah. "Phoenix Police Detective." Personal interview. 14 March, 2014.
Toon, Richard, and Bill Hart. Layers of Meaning: Domestic Violence and Law Enforcement
Attitudes in Arizona. Tempe: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, 2005. Web.
---. System Alert: Arizona's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence. Tempe: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, 2007. Web.
