Washington's legislature, DV and the accused in the Afghan civilian murders

On Monday, March 19. There will meeting will be in Cherberg Building on Capitol Campus from 9:00-11:00 AM in conference room 429.  The meeting is about whether or not the rules of evidence should be applied in granting extended protection orders. 

Currently anyone with a vagina can get a protection order against anyone with penis just by visiting the court house.  That order is supposed to be temporary but can be renewed forever, w/out any evidence.  Women's advocates and attorney's LOVE this because it skews the playing field in their favor in divorce and custody hearings.  Anyone who can fill out a form is an automatic victim of domestic violence.  Those same benefactors are in opposition of the rules of evidence.  They say evidence is just "too hard." 

One very big problem, aside from royally screwing over innocent men, this does nothing to help actual victims of domestic violence.  When everyone is a victim, no one is a victim.  They systemic effect is that there is now a giant trail of money going to a system that really doesn't give a crap about whether actual victims are protected, but flourishes when tons of women leverage it for vengence.

It's coming out that Robert Bales was prosecuted for assault on a girlfriend in 2002.  I'm no expert in the rules of the military, but my understanding from speaking with those who serve is that even an accusation that never gets prosecuted will stop you from getting promoted.  Hence a DV accusation is a powerful weapon with lots of teeth, it does everything imaginable to destroy the accused but nothing to protect actual victims.    Just ask those dead Afghan civilians.

Though the media is releasing lots of juicy quotes and tid bits, we don't have all the facts in the Bales case.  I am noticing a trend with the Bales DV connection:  the same DV system that attempts to avert the constitution and other inconvenient things like rules of evidence, also fails to protect victims.

My take is that DV is a crime and should be treated like one.  In speaking with friends (mostly liberal), who have served on DV juries, their attitude going in is that they've love to put a wifebeater behind bars, but after serving, they walk away disgusted at the performance of prosecutors.  Sloth and ineptitude are two words used.  Oddly I don't see the prosecutors blushing.  Fact: toads, goats and lawyers are not capable of shame. 

I hope the media really drills into the DV case with Bales.  It will be illuminating.