Some attorneys are attempting to use Ohio's new gay marriage amendment to defend unmarried clients against domestic violence charges.
The constitutional amendment took effect on December first. It denies legal status to unmarried couples.
In at least two cases last week, the Cuyahoga County public defender's office has asked a judge to dismiss domestic-violence charges against unmarried defendants. The attorneys in the two cases argue that the charges violate the amendment by affording marriage-like legal status to unmarried victims who live with the people accused of attacking them.
Advocates for victims of domestic violence have worried about the effect of the amendment since it passed in November. They fear defense attorneys around the state will copy the tactic used in Cuyahoga County.
I'm not too savvy on the law myself, but as an additional resource, here's the amendment in question:
Section 11. Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer
"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.
Might work, might not. If nothing else the judge can see the wrong charges were filed and simply make it a straight assualt case.
Either way it just goes to show you that these laws do far more to hurt to everyone than any concievable good that could come from following the dictates of the man in the sky. Maybe the non-bigoted straights will wake up to that.
Someone I was just talking to about this pointed out that domestic violence contains protocol for evicting hostile people. This means that people who are only emotionally abusive fall under this category. It has provisions for eviction, restraining orders, as well as divorce proceedings, if necessary. At least, this is the case where my friend lives (NC). If Ohio is similar, then it would appear that this is quite serious a challenge, indeed.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer
"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.
Vendetta wrote:Lack of a legally recognised relationship is meant to justify common assault how?
i guess domestic violence is punished harder than common assault?
The jail time and such are. In most cases the two are prosecuted under the same or virtually identical charges. It's just qualifying it as domestic abuse make it much, much easier to legally terminate the relationship.
Of course that's assuming that this domestic abuse is actually phsyical rather than emotional abuse. That becomes far, far more tricky to prosecute if it can't be classified as domestic abuse. Harassment laws are shit, everywhere and all over, shit.
They have to be, otherwise law enforcement officers would have to spend half their time arresting each other.
Chronological Incontinence: Time warps around the poster. The thread topic winks out of existence and reappears in 1d10 posts.
Out of Context Theatre, this week starring Darth Nostril.
-'If you really want to fuck with these idiots tell them that there is a vaccine for chemtrails.'
