A. Ann Ratnayake · February 2016
84 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. Arguendo 18
Society has only recently made strides to help victims of intimate
partner violence. “At time of founding,” a husband, as master of his
household, had a privilege recognized by law to subject his wife to corporal
punishment or chastisement [beating] so long as he did not inflict
permanent injury upon her. Since the law at the time viewed wives as
belonging to their husbands, what happened between them was regarded as
a private matter and was not a concern to the criminal justice system.
While battery against a wife was no longer viewed a privilege in the
20th century, the family court system sought to marginalize marital
violence. Rather than punish those who assaulted their partners, judges
and social workers urged couples to reconcile. Family courts
“discouraged [battered wives] from filing criminal charges against their
husbands, urged [wives] to accept responsibility for their role in provoking
the violence, and encouraged them to remain in the relationship and rebuild
it rather than attempt to separate or divorce.”
…
In the 1980s and 1990s prosecutors began using evidenced-based prosecution
when victims recanted.8 Evidence-based prosecution used 911 tapes,
statements made to police officers, grand juries, neighbors, photos of
injuries, jail house calls, and other corroborative evidence to prove a case
of battery even when the victim refused to testify against her abuser. But
this technique became difficult when the Supreme Court expanded its
Confrontation Clause jurisprudence.
