False Accusations

I’m not usually over enamoured with the effects and understanding shown about Domestic Violence issues by my local Police Force.  However, a report in the Nottingham Post of 9^th September 2014 shows that perhaps things are changing.

 In the report entitled “Woman’s lies got her ex-partner arrested, “ the account tells how

“Pregnant Amy Whitham’s ex-partner was arrested after she falsely claimed he was going to arrange to “have her head kicked in,” a court heard.”

Obviously the Police have a duty to investigate such allegations. I do wonder whether they would have treated the accusation with the same enthusiasm though had the complainant been the male ex-partner!  I doubt it.

However, the report continues:

“He was arrested and questioned by detectives, Notting Crown Court heard.  But police soon established that the only person sending the messages was Whitham – through an e-mail account she had set up in his name.  Yesterday Whitham was sentenced for perverting the course of justice – on the strength of her making the false witness statement to police last November.”

So well done Nottingham Police for charging this woman.  What sentence did she receive?  To continue quoting the report:

“Judge James Sampson decided not to send Whitham into custody because she has two young children to care for and is expecting a third.  “As a mark of compassion, I’m prepared to suspend this sentence,” he told her.

Again, I ask ‘Would such compassion have been shown to her ex-partner?’  Probably not.  We all know that should he have been charged with the false allegation, he would have received a custodial sentence.

Further more, why do Judges be far more lenient on women criminals when well-known documentary evidence exists that states that young children are more at risk from harm in the care of mothers than fathers?  

Women such as Amy Whitham who think nothing of making false accusations against partners actually make it far more difficult for real victims to speak out and be heard, irrespective of gender.

Why did she do it?  To quote the report again, “No reasons were given at the hearing about why Whitham made up the claims.”

Now that’s a real surprise isn’t it?   I can tell you exactly why.   Whitham was on a revenge mission and wanting to hurt her former partner.  What easier way than to make up such allegations?   Women like Whitham know the climate is such that once she’d made her statement, her ex-partner would be seen as ‘guilty, until proven innocent.’  Fortunately, in this case, his innocence could be proved.  I have also heard of divorce settlements where Lawyers have encouraged the woman to make an accusation of domestic abuse in order to secure both a bigger alimony and residence of children.  This has been in relationships where there has been no record or evidence of abuse, no investigation of the allegations carried out, and yet the mere mention of being seen to be a victim of domestic violence has resulted in the desired financial reward.

The whole system needs an overhaul so that the practise of making false allegations stops completely.

Woman No Cry, Man Out Cry (Part One)

Forgive the poetic licence used in titling this piece ‘Woman No Cry, Man Out Cry’ but I wish to highlight once more the different attitudes regarding men and women accused of Domestic Violence offences.

When a man, celebrity or otherwise, is reported as being a Domestic Violence perpetrator there is often a huge public outcry and rightly so.  However  when a female is the assailant, a different attitude prevails.  In fact, most approaches seem to project the reports in a jovial fashion.  I find this totally shocking because if you are the victim of abuse, it doesn’t matter who your abuser is, it is not humorous or amusing. 

This week has since a few more examples in the national media.  One is an actress who is serialising her autobiography through media outlets.  This actress is probably better known for the paparazzi  coverage given to her many high-profile romances than her body of work.   Her beau’s include Jason Statham, Billy Zane, Thom Evans, David McIntosh and Danny Capriani. 

Kelly Brook admits to hitting ex-boyfriends Jason Statham and Danny Capriani.  In her account, she justifies her actions by saying that she attacked English Rugby player Danny Capriani after discovering that he was cheating on her.  The general attitude towards this is “good for you girl, the cheat deserved it and had it coming.  Now, imagine for a moment that the roles was reversed.  If Mr. Capriani had struck Ms. Brook and then claimed that he only did it in response to discovering infidelity, would that make it acceptable?   Of course not,  violence is never acceptable and shouldn’t be acceptable under any circumstances.  So why does society seem to think that a woman hitting a man is acceptable when a man striking a woman in similar circumstances is clearly not??

Ms Brook also admits to hitting hard-man movie actor Jason Statham.  She justifies this behaviour by claiming this was because he made flirty comments about another actress while with her.  Again, reverse the genders and would such action be tolerated?  I think not.

Ms Brook actually offers an insight into her behaviour when she writes:

“ My earliest memory is of my mother throwing an iron down the stairwell at my dad after he came back late from the pub.”

So the lesson she learnt from her parents was   If you think your partner steps out of line, you punish them with violence. 

There should never be any excuse for violence towards another person  irrespective of gender, race, religion, sexuality. 

Why is it then when women are the perpetrators, we don’t treat it with the contempt it deserves, but society continues to find the idea of a female attacking a man rather amusing?  

You Couldn't make it up

Many people look forward to their holidays away to rest by the pool/beach and enter into some light reading while they sunbathe.  Sunbathing isn’t really my thing, but reading most certainly is and I was away on holiday, I had more time to absorb myself in the daily newspapers and books that were in my ‘to read’ pile.  Most people have a ‘to do’ list.  I purchase books and have a ‘to read’ list which is never exhausted.

News stories and articles about Domestic Violence always catch my attention, and in a matter of days the several different papers I read, carried several stories.   Bizarrely, there seemed to be the publication of several studies which made claims of how Domestic Violence could either be caused or prevented all reaching the printed media at the same time. 

The most sensible was The Times 26^th August 2014

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4186759.ece

“Constantly telling a partner that she is fat may be a symptom of domestic abuse, according to a Labour frontbencher.

Seema Malhotra, appointed yesterday to the newly created post of shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls, said that trying to erode someone’s self-esteem could be part of a broader pattern of behaviour.”

Although this report is written in the gender-specific fashion that I abhor, later in the article an acknowledgement that men are victims too.

“She highlighted figures showing that 12 million woman and 2.5 million men had been the victims of domestic abuse.”

I would question those statistics, but at least the plight of men wasn’t ignored completely.

However, the day before that report appeared the same august publication ran this story:

CANNABIS MAY BE KEY TO GOOD RELATIONSHIP

“Couples who smoke cannabis are less likely to engage in domestic violence, US research suggests.

Married couples who both use cannabis at least twice a month reported the least perpetration of violence. If only the husband used cannabis, this reduced the likelihood of the wife being violent.”

Ah, so that explains why my ex-wife was abusive to me, I didn’t smoke cannabis.  In fact, I’ve never smoke cannabis.  Maybe I should have done if this ‘reduced the likelihood of the wife being violent.’

However my favourite report also appeared on the 28^th August , but in one of our tabloid newspapers, The Sun:

KEBABS ‘CAN CUT VIOLENCE’

“A Solicitor was under fire yesterday for claiming kebabs could cut domestic violence.  Janet Hood, 57, spoke at a licensing hearing to get a takeaway’s opening hours extended.  She said in Dundee eating would make drunks too tired to attack.  Ms Hood added: “Medical evidence suggests eating after drinking helps induce sleep, which could help lower alcohol-related domestic violence.”

Now if you know me, you will know that I love and enjoy eating kebabs.  And, unlike the majority of the population, I enjoy these when I’m sober and I certainly don’t fall asleep after consumption.  However, it set me thinking about my past.

Both my ex-wife and myself never drank alcohol as part of our religious observance.  So her violence towards me wasn’t alcohol-induced.  She also seldom ate kebabs preferring to order fish when I visited the local takeaway.  For me, it was kebabs as the healthy option (well, you do get a portion of salad with them).  

I can’t comment on the effects of Cannabis, but Kebabs didn’t cut out the violence I experienced.  In fact, I probably ate more kebabs because I was a victim of Domestic Violence

.  I didn’t drink alcohol or smoke, so comfort eating kebabs was my escape from the suffering I endured.

You can call me fat because I have eaten too many kebabs.  Maybe I should have smoked cannabis instead but that would have had other implications for me I’m sure (It would also have been contravening the religious views I held at that time) .

Smoking Cannabis or eating kebabs will never cut domestic violence.  You couldn’t make it up, but someone obviously did!!!

Being Politically Correct

Rotherham, a place now synonymous with yet another child abuse scandal.  Over 1,400 young girls were groomed by a large gang of perpetrators.  The real tragedy of this is that all the authorities were aware of what was happening but choose to turn a blind eye because they were more fearful of upsetting the PC Brigade.  Rather than being branded as Racist ,the powers that be decided to ignore the cries for help from young, Caucasian girls allowing their Asian perpetrators to continue carrying out sickening attacks. 

Similar gangs had been victimising young girls in other parts of the United Kingdom and have only recently been brought to justice such as Oxford and Derby.  The scale of known abuse in Rotherham is horrific and any culture that has allowed such crimes to flourish should be condemned.

Were the roles reversed, and young asian girls were reporting being attacked by Caucasian males, I’m certain that the crimes would have been thoroughly investigated by the authorities and those involved would have quickly been dealt with.

Instead, fearful of being seen as targeting an ethnic group and being labelled as Institutionally Racist, the authorities were apathetic.

This comes after the revelations that Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris and many other well-known personalities exploited their privileged iconic statuses to violate many innocent victims.  Again, accusations were ignored because of the perpetrators appearing above the law.  

People seem willing to exploit their fame, race and gender creating a cesspool of perversion.

Such Political Correctness is not about Equality and Diversity.  If it was , allegations would have been investigated when first made. 

The authorities, apprehensive of upsetting a powerful ethnic group, decided to ignore the many claims being made.    This doesn’t just happen with race, the same ‘political correctness’ applies to gender issues too. 

The same authorities, afraid of being accused as ‘sexist’ by militant feminists will act in similar fashion ignoring the cries for help from men.  As a result, many crimes committed by women against men are ignored. 

When I’ve received ‘Children/Vulnerable persons’ training, an integral part of the session is that any and all accusations of abuse must be accepted and referred to the appropriate agency.  Clearly, that has not been happening in England and gives the abuser even greater power of their victims. The statement  “No-body will believe you because a) of my race b) of my gender  c) I’m famous,”  needs to lose its power over the victim, but this can only happen when all victims of abuse know that there exists a safe system in which they can confidently speak out into. 

False allegations are soon proved to be false, the truth always stands out.  It’s time for the climate to change.  ALL abuse is wrong and the words of a victim must be believed and acted upon.   

Justification?

A report appeared in my local newspaper that  led to  an online discussion about the nature of Domestic Violence where a 32 year old woman admitted she assaulted her partner by throwing a garden spiked candle-holder at him.  The third throw hit him causing a two inch cut.   It was good to see that a man felt he could press charges, although it was actually the man’s mother who reported the crime.  Good on her I say.

Anyhow, what annoyed me was the punishment dished out to the woman.   She got a community order which included 14 sessions at the local women's centre.    What are they going to teach her there ??? That she was really the victim as men are to blame for everything? Will they help her improve her aim so that next time it only takes her one attempt to hit her target???? Absolutely unbelievable.

Expressing this view led to some comments that seemed to want to justify the woman’s actions.  He must have deserved it, he had it coming, he must have provoked her, it must have been self-defence etc.  When excessive force is used however, it can’t be self-defence, more a case of mutual violence.

And yet, were the gender roles reversed, no-one would try and justify such action.  It would be wrong because he was a nasty man attacking an innocent woman.  He certainly would not have got a community order punishment which included 14 sessions at a local men’s centre.  Dare I say it, his punishment most likely would have been at Her Majesty’s Pleasure. 

I’ve encountered such attitudes before, and I have to say that strangely enough, its women who will try to justify the actions of another violent woman.  It’s as if they can’t accept that women can be as violent as men,  and so there has to be some rationale behind the assault.

There is NEVER any justification for any form of domestic  violence.  There is no excuse for domestic abuse. 

Please don’t try to justify any one else’s violence.  They may be ill, they may need help etc, but that is NO EXCUSE EVER.  Think about it next time, any assault is verbally indefensible. 

Hope

I’ve been meditating on ‘Hope’ for some months now.  It strikes me that hope is the one thing we all hold on to when everything else comes crashing down.  The appeal is that we can always hope for something better. 

For example, in a relationship blighted by domestic violence, the victim very seldom leaves when the abuse first manifests itself.  We ‘hope’ for change.  We make excuses for the perpetrator telling ourselves that they are not well, they are under stress, they may be drinking too much etc.  We hope that they will ‘get better’ or change and everything will be fine.  The longer the situation carries on, the victim realises that this particular ‘hope’ won’t occur, so the hope changes.  The victim hopes for a day when everything is peaceful, and tries to do nothing that would cause offence or trigger a violent episode in their partner.  However, even this approach is flawed, because the mood swings are so random and unpredictable as the perpetrator will find any reason to attack.   Finally, when the victim is completely worn down, feeling worthless and virtually hopeless, the glimmer of a new future away from the perpetrator presents a new hope.  Just how though, remains a mystery as the victim can’t see any way to escape and by this time, all rational thought processes have been destroyed by the constant abuse suffered.

People need hope to survive.  The oppressed often turn to religion because of the hope faith offers.  Most (if not all) faith offers you the hope of a better life in the next world.  “Today’s life will be tough and hard, but don’t worry” adherents of a religion will tell you, “because if you follow XXXXXX  or this path, you will be fine in the next world/life.”  The promise of something better in the future gives hope.  Pie in the Sky when you die.  Furthermore, if you look to a religion/faith for hope, its followers are most embracing and welcoming of you especially when they think they may have a new recruit.  They will do anything and offer all sorts of assistance to make you want to feel part of that group.   Mind you if you turn your back on that group, your so-called friends may no longer offer you the same hand of friendship you previously experienced.   The future hope you signed up to when you acknowledged believe in that faith system evaporates.  You are no longer one of the chosen ones.

Hope is always there.  Hope is not reliant on external circumstances or beliefs.  There comes a time when you just have to grasp it.  Any abusive relationship will never change and if you are being victimised, your only hope is leaving and starting again.  Staying will only result in further problems and difficulties and could even cost you your life.  That hope you may have of a life free from abuse is available to you, but you have to grasp it with both hands and doing that requires a big, bold step.

Karma

At a recent family gathering, I was asked what my views were concerning Karma.  It seemed a little strange as an opening gambit from a relative who I only tend to see at family occasions.  However, I’ve often posted about my spiritual journey which has taken me from being a Christian church minister  to flirting with Atheism.  So I guess, it wasn’t  that strange a question after all.  I had certainly been reflecting on my own beliefs and the origins of personal belief.  My initial response was to say that “it’s probably easier to say what I don’t believe, rather than what I do believe.”

I don’t believe in the concepts of eternal/everlasting or indeed previous lives now.  The only thing we know with any certainty is that we are living this life now.  There is no factual evidence for anything before or after.  I know that some people claim to have had near-death experiences that equate to their own particular belief of what happens next, and there are those who under a form of hypnosis called past-life regression.   My own take on these ‘experiences’ is that the person’s own belief system has already influenced that person’s mind, so your sub conscious tells you what you want to hear. 

Similarly, well-meaning Christians have tried to convince me of the errors of my ways in turning my back on their faith by employing  Pascal’s Wager.  Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy which was devised by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–1662). It posits that humans all bet with their lives either that God exists or not. Given the possibility that God actually does exist and assuming an infinite gain or loss associated with belief or unbelief in said God (as represented by an eternity in heaven or hell), a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss.  In other words, you have nothing to infinite loss, but everything to gain by believing in a God.  If the Judeo-Christian God doesn’t exist, you lose nothing.  It’s a hedge your bets argument.  Strange when most Christians/church teaching is opposed to Gambling, they ask you to ‘bet on the existence of god.’

As for Karma I can’t hold the view that my existence in a previous life, affects my current position now.  I have made conscious decisions and then had to live with the consequences of those decisions, many positive and some negative.  Nothing from an unknown past has influenced those decisions. 

However, there is a different type of Karma that we all often refer too.  Phrase like “What goes round comes round,” and “they’ll get what coming to them” has entered our vocabulary.   When someone hurts us or commits an injustice against us and isn’t punished, we use the afore-mentioned statements hoping that everything balances out, that the pain we have felt will soon be inflicted on the person that hurt us.  Does it happen?  It would be nice and rather comforting to think that it does, but in all reality it probably doesn’t.  My abuser has never accepted any responsibility for her actions and has failed to grasp the impact and consequences of her violent actions have had on me or our children.  While I hoped that natural karma would happen, so far it hasn’t.  She carried on living her live oblivious to the destruction she’s caused.  For me, I had to let go of wanting such karma to happen and move on with my life.   While I was anxious for my abuser to receive retribution for her crimes against me, the angst it caused me was a way of still allowing her to abuse me.    I guess I don’t believe in any form of Karma either. 

All that matters to me is the here and now and what I make of it.