Moderated by Tom Sabulis
An activist against domestic abuse says our justice system is ineffective with cases like that of Donna Kristofak, who was killed last month allegedly by her ex-husband after he was released from jail early for threatening her with a knife. Two judges respond that protective orders can work, but greater vigilance from agencies and the public are needed to protect victims.
Commenting is open below following the column by Stephen D. Kelley and Peggy H. Walker.
By Stacey Dougan
I read with anguish the article describing Donna Kristofak’s public pleas for help just two months before being murdered, allegedly by her ex-husband. In court last October, seeking protection from the man who earlier had tried to stab her in a Wal-Mart parking lot, Donna requested that the “record reflect” she feared for her life.
Cobb County Judge Adele Grubbs struck a sympathetic tone, responding that a protection order coupled with the threat of immediate incarceration for any violation thereof was the best protection the system could provide. Two months later, Donna was dead; her ex-husband, who had promised he’d kill her, stands accused of stabbing her to death in the garage of her East Cobb home.
Contacted after the killing, Judge Grubbs invoked the Newtown murders, saying, “You cannot predict human behavior. After Newtown people ask, ‘How can we stop someone before they do something?’ We don’t do that.”
As domestic violence advocate Jean Douglas stated in a Dec. 28 AJC article, “red flags” warned of the threats Donna faced. Red flags appeared through the previous attempted murder, explicit threats, humiliating and intimidating posters placed in her front yard, and calls to her workplace using “vile, vulgar language to her and her coworkers.” This was not a situation where the system was waiting for the assailant to do something; rather, it was waiting for him to do more.
The judge’s attempt to parallel this homicide with the Newtown case is dangerous, as it creates a mystique around domestic violence that simply does not exist. The death of Donna Kristofak was not an unforeseeable, random act of violence. Like many domestic violence homicides, Donna’s killing was explicitly predicted — promised — by the alleged assailant himself.
All of these signs were more than enough for the judge or anyone knowledgeable about domestic violence to know that Donna faced extreme peril. We cannot permit a proverbial throwing up of the hands lamenting that some victims simply can’t be protected due to the unpredictability of the violence perpetrated against them.
I also find deeply troubling Judge Grubbs’ final comment that the “most worrisome cases are the ones where a woman tells the court that her husband didn’t mean to threaten her and she wants him back.”
Why would that type of case be more worrisome than one like Donna’s, where a victim is facing unrelenting violence and threats of murder? These comments raise the specter of victim blaming, putting the focus on women who “won’t leave” their abusers rather than the abusers who “won’t let” their partners go.
Random violence happens every day. But conflating the horrific murders in Newtown with what happened to Donna Kristofak is neither accurate nor just. The parents of the Newtown children had no way of knowing what would happen when they sent their children to school on Dec. 14. The danger facing Donna Kristofak was not only predictable, it was predicted — by the alleged killer himself.
Let us not compound the tragedy by pretending there was nothing we could have done before it happened.
Stacey Dougan is board chairwoman of Men Stopping Violence, an Atlanta-based organization that engages men in ending violence against women and girls (www.menstoppingviolence.org).
By Stephen D. Kelley and Peggy H. Walker
The criminal justice system cannot end family violence in isolation. Preventing the epidemic that claimed 123 Georgians’ lives in 2012 takes a resolute and sustained effort from the entire community. Every day, police, judges, prosecutors, advocates and probation officers protect many women and children who do not feel safe in their homes.
According to the Georgia Crime Information Center, 23,086 family violence and stalking orders were issued in 2012. Every case is unique, but abusers generally fall into two categories: those who adhere to court orders, and those who blatantly disregard them.
Many victims of family violence are safer with protective orders. A recent National Institute of Justice study found that protective orders worked for half of the victims who obtained them. An overwhelming majority of the other half reported significant decreases in threats, violence, control and fear.
We do not hear from many people who benefit from protective orders. Once victims gain peace from the violence, they move on with their lives.
Highlighting only the failures of the criminal justice system is dangerous. It discourages people in abusive relationships from seeking help. If victims believe that the criminal justice system cannot protect them, they may remain exposed to continuing harm that can be prevented.
Tragically, a protective order did not save Donna Kristofak’s life. Her ex-husband disregarded the law. He repeatedly threatened her, violated court orders and stalked her, and now he’s charged with killing her. For many like Donna, the law was not enough.
The National Institute of Justice study confirmed experts’ suspicions that protective-order violators, like Donna’s ex-husband, who stalk victims are extremely dangerous. The increased risk posed by family violence offenders who disregard court orders suggests that victims of stalking need all of the support and protection they can get from the criminal justice system and other agencies.
Stalking is a crime in all 50 states, yet many criminal justice professionals and victims underestimate its seriousness. We must encourage victims to seek refuge through domestic violence agencies (1-800-33-HAVEN) and the criminal justice system; they save lives. Our courts and law enforcement agencies must take family violence and stalking with the utmost seriousness, swiftly and strongly punishing abusers and stalkers and becoming educated about lethality factors.
The Georgia Commission on Family Violence and other groups are endorsing legislation this year that will give law enforcement officers more authority to arrest offenders who willfully violate court orders for the purpose of harassing and stalking victims. We encourage its support.
There is no one solution for victims. But protective orders, along with coordinated community responses, are much more than pieces of paper for many. They’re tools to create safety for victims and their children and to provide accountability for the unacceptable behaviors of perpetrators.
Stephen D. Kelley, chairman of the Georgia Commission on Family Violence, is a superior court judge in the Brunswick Judicial Circuit. Peggy H. Walker is a juvenile court judge in Douglas County.
11 comments Add your comment
Scott Evans
January 11th, 2013
8:27 pm
What about women who beat/kill/stalk and so on the men they are with? Why is DV ALWAYS made out to be about women being beat? Men get beat and everything like women. So, stop protecting women and start protecting everyone. That to me seems like a better stand for the court and police and everyone else. This makes me made every time people make DV out to be only against women. Wake up. If the police and the court system would see that women do the same thing that men do then we could start to have a better understanding of why PEOPLE do this and why PEOPLE don’t care about the ones they are with. This is a PEOPLE issue not a female issue. When a cop is called out to deal with a women that is being aggressive towards the man the cop laughs and leaves. The courts and the cops need to stop dealing with DV half way and start dealing with it fully and we could make progress. They need to see that just because a women calls the cops first that it dont mean they are the victim. Men are victims also. The attitude is whoever calls first is the victim. Also it is the attitude of, almost, everyone that men can’t be beaten on. That men can stop it if they want to. So, if men can stop the women how are they suppose to do this? Grab the women, restrain her, or what? Anyway you look at it he will have to touch her, no not beat, and then he goes to jail for touching her. Please tell me I am wrong so that I can show you the reports I have filed where the cops laughed at me because my wife was beating on me and I would not touch her and if I tried to leave there she was with a knife at the door trying to stab me. The cops laugh and say we cant charge her she is smaller than you. Wake up people this is not a female issue it is a human issue. Protect all or protect no one it is your choice. My choice is to protect all.
Morris
January 11th, 2013
7:37 pm
Unfortunately, no piece of paper can deter a determined individual, This is another tragic situation. However, the bigger picture is this…If we disarm who will protect us, the police? We see how that can sometimes work against a woman. The supreme court has already ruled some years ago that it is not the responsibility of the police to protect you or I. So then, if that is the case in who’s hands do you leave your defense and protection to? Disarming the populace is not the answer, ask any woman how they feel about disarming knowing that a crazy is out there determined to do her harm. We don’t need gun control…we need people control !
TBreland
January 11th, 2013
2:55 pm
I had a protective order when I left my boyfriend after 3yrs. I had to go every couple of weeks for months to get the 2year protective order. His attorney kept coming up with reasons to put it off. In the meantime, I was continually reissued the 30 day temporary until we could get into court. I think in some instances, a protective order does help. Some instances. My ex was afraid of police and jail. And he was afraid of having a record. Go figure. The problem lie in the fact that he felt anything he did (to me) in the privacy of our home, was no ones business. For at least 2yrs, I watched every vehicle that drove past my home. Some nights I slept on the couch within easy reach of the handgun underneath it after spotting him anywhere near. I made it known to people who knew both of us, I would shoot and kill him if he came near me. We do need to rely on our police officers, but we need to do what we need to do to take care of ourselves too. I was done with the abuse and not knowing if I would live to see the next day.
sarahritchey
January 11th, 2013
2:54 pm
Why so quick to judge Donna? She had children and a life here – why should the burden be on her to leave the state? What a great solution – if your husband starts threatening you like a maniac, just give up everything you have and move away and quit complaining! What a cold response. Not every conversation has to be about gun rights. We can actually have guns and measures for self-protection as an option, *and* have a justice system that protects women who have been threatened so clearly. Why are we trying to make these things opposed? No one’s reported on whether Donna owned a gun – why are we assuming she didn’t try to protect herself? That’s such an unfair assumption – I’d say going through the legal proceedings she did is a pretty good indicator she wanted to protect herself. I’m all for women protecting themselves. I’m also for judges fulfilling the responsibility of their position and making better choices than this.I’m disgusted that Judge Grubbs has not yet resigned and defended herself so inappropriately. Accept responsibility and step down.
woody
January 11th, 2013
1:20 pm
We live in a social system where laws suppress maybe 40% of illegal activity. If that is the case, then your safety is still pretty much in your own hands. If some crazy man is threatening your LIFE should you even be living in the same state?
Quantavious
January 11th, 2013
12:03 pm
The first poster suggests that the judge should have incarcerated the husband with no bond “and let him sit there”. Really, for the rest of his life? How totally absurd.
Protective orders are mostly worthless, the police aren’t going to provide bodyguard service 24 hours a day. The aggrieved spouse has to take responsibility for his/her own security, which might include obtaining and learning how to use a gun.
Hobie Jones
January 11th, 2013
11:17 am
Ms. Dougan’s column was, in my opinion, right on the mark. I do not know Judge Grubbs – I’ve heard of her – nothing more than that. However, I have practiced law for 26 years and for about 20 years sat as a municipal court judge. That’s the lowest level of judge there is…no denying that. But I did regularly hear domestic violence cases. Before I make my remarks I will acknowledge that I detest “Monday morning quarterbacks”…or people who know precisely what should have been done after the fact. There are enough of those around; nevertheless if the AJC has reported the facts correctly it seems there was more than enough evidence for Judge Grubbs to have put Mr. Kristofak in jail with no bond and let him sit there. I mean after all – he had threatened/promised/advertised he was going to kill his wife. And he did. I am with Ms. Dougan – to judicially throw your hands up and suggest… “what more could I have done”…..I vehemently disagree. Borders on nonsense.
Chip
January 11th, 2013
8:52 am
Interesting. At no point in this discussion has anyone mentioned the Second Amendment… but then, according to the Iiberal philosophy of this newspaper, obviously women are supposed to remain helpless, cowering in fear, until paternalistic government comes along to take care of them.
No, we can’t mention firearms as a possible option for self defense from violent abusers. That might empower women to fight back and stand on their own two feet. Are liberals afraid that women’s pretty little heads can’t handle it? Are women too weak and frail to stand up for themselves? Worst of all, might some of these women fall into a state of confusion where they actually think they might take control of their own lives?
Can’t have such dangerous non-liberal thoughts, can we?
SAWB
January 11th, 2013
12:24 am
We all probably know of cases where spouses lie about the other in an effort to get the upper hand in a divorce case. While all a Judge can do is make decisions based on the information at hand they should begin to charge those who lie or exaggerate to take advantage of the system. If Judges don’t have so much misinformation to deal with maybe they can catch the true predators.
nelson
January 10th, 2013
5:41 pm
No one knows better than the wife the level of hostility that her husband has and his willingness to resort to violence. It is ludicrous for her to assume the law enforcement and judge will protect her, although they can if the husband is incarcerated until the spouse can find a safe haven.
Well enough of that, many a time when the spouse should hit the road and protect themselves but are reluctant to leave familiar surroundings.