what happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Question

recently a family member was accused of assault. In all his years of life he has never been in trouble with the law, never been arrested. He and his girlfriend get into an argument, she pokes her finger in his face and is screaming at him and then picks the phone up as to hit him with it and in his defense he pins her against the wall to keep her from hitting him with the phone and she calls 911. He leaves. He never struck her or hit her in any way, and also she has no marks, redness or bruises, but yet she still takes warrant/charges for assault against him. There were no signs of struggle or any ill act, but yet he stills gets arrested and put in jail and now faces court, court cost and fines and a smear on his until now clean record. What does a man do to prove his innocence or at least prove self defense? What does she have to prove? or do the police just take her word for it b/c she's a woman?

Answer 1

First of all, if you could not be arrested until proven guilty, no one would ever be convicted of anything. Imagine if we could not arrest a bank robber and put him in jail until he has had a trial!

Any reasonable suspicion of a crime warrants an arrest and to be detained in jail. That is not a statement of innocence or guilt. Assumed innocence does not mean that you cannot be detained long enough to determine if the charges brought against you are true or not. Assumed innocence simply means that when you have your day in court the burden of proof is on the prosecution. If they cannot prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt then you are assumed innocent, and you are free to go.

You case is not "proved" to the cops. They make a judgment call, simple as that. In fact, if she presses charges they HAVE to arrest him. When this case goes to court, however, it must be proven that he assaulted her. If they cannot prove assault, your kin will be let go.

That will depend upon the laws. Honestly, it will be hard to show that pinning a woman was more necessary in self-defense than running away. If pinning someone against a wall is considered assault, he may be guilty of the crime, even if it doesn't seem fair.

Answer 2

Innocent until proven guilty IN A COURT OF LAW. If you had to prove beyond a doubt guilt before even arresting someone, well...you could see how impossible that would be.

The gf giving a statement that he assaulted her is probable grounds to arrest him and now he will have his day in court. Most places now have a "zero tolerance"policy which essentially means that even if the complainant retracts their complaint, the government can still proceed with prosecution.

If it is his first offence and the "assault" is a minor nature, the Prosecutor will more than likely stay the charges ( means they drop them but reverve the right to proceed if he gets in trouble again) provided he complete anger management counselling or something of the like.

Also, zero tolerance or not, the charges would likely be dropped if the complainant does not show up to testify on the trial date.

Answer 3

You have got plenty of practical reasonable answers here. Your family member will have his day in court -- that's what the presumption of innocence is all about. It's not about letting boys be boys or permitting abusers to get out of responsibility simply by killing or terrifying their victims (not to say your relative is an abuser -- only that this would be the practical effect of letting REAL abusers walk free).

I would just add that there are a couple of things in your story that don't quite add up for me. First of all, in addition to being an affirmative defense, the "self-defense" exception allows the use of force only as the absolute last resort to avoid imminent physical harm. When the use of force is an option, there is no valid self-defense argument. From your fact pattern here, it seems that instead of pinning his girlfriend against the wall, he could have run away. (And I don't think that fleeing is any less manly than using violence against a physically weaker person.) It does seem that the use of force was a choice here.

The second thing I don't quite get is why your relative's girlfriend chose a telephone, of all things, to use as a weapon. Seems to me that if she really wanted to attack, she'd pick up something heavier. Like a chair. (Reminds me of a case I handled once peripherally. The wife was brought to the ER with massive blunt-force trauma to the back of the head. The husband claimed she hit HERSELF in the back of the head with a baseball bat in order to get him in trouble. For the record, the wife was not a contortionist.)

Answer 4

In many states, there are domestic violence laws intended to protect genuine victims of domestic violence. They usually include requirements that someone be arrested if there's probable cause to believe DV occurred, and a requirement that the "primary physical agressor" be arrested. If any marks were left at all on the woman (or even the wall), that's enough evidence for probable cause.

Your family member is innocent until proven guilty, but cops don't arrest if they're 100% positive that he did something, but only if they have "probable cause" to believe he did. And certainly victim testimony can be enough.

The complication is that your family member doesn't deny doing what he did -- but he said he did it in self-defense. The rules on self-defense vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but it is most often an "affirmative defense." -- meaning that he may have to PROVE (usually by a preponderance of the evidence) that he took reasonable action to avert the imminent threat. The question is, who do you believe? And he may have to go to trial, and many other factors may affect believeability. That's just how our system works.

Answer 5

The burden of proof is on the prosecution. They must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he assaulted her. With no visible signs of a struggle and only her word against his, there is probably not enough proof . I say probably because I wasn't there and do not know everything that went on. He probably has a good case for self-defense if all he did was restrain her from hitting him and then left.

Answer 6

Subpoena the arresting officer and/or the officer who took his statement, make sure there is a copy of that statement in court. The girlfriend will have a police report as evidence and your relative will need to debunk it, with his statement.
When you say "family member", do you mean "I"? Either way, good luck with the case.

Answer 7

The problem is the family member became involved in one of the most dangerous and highly volatile criminal area, domestic violence

As such in today's society the women over the man in the majority of the complaints will be given the benefit of the doubt, out side physical evidence to the contrary

In your family member case it is best to retain the best possible criminal lawyer, if the DA would go threw with the prosecution, your brother will need the best defense to take this one to trial and win

Answer 8

In America, the police have to take the supposed victim's word for it. The fact that she's a woman probably helps her get her way. If the only evidence she has in court is what she says, and the police cannot determine something happened, the case will most likely be dismissed.

Answer 9

Innocent until provern guilty in a court of law is the phrase. When he goes to court, evidence will be presented by the prosecutor and family member's defense attorney. Then the judge will decide whether he's innocent or guilty.

Answer 10

You get a chance in court. You can be arrested for almost anything. They only have to prove your guilt in court. Unfortunatly yes the cops will tend to believe the womens story unless she is obviously nuts..