Warnings From Victims of Domestic Violence Should Produce Protection

Law enforcement agencies must protect citizens irrespective of their sex, race or the area in which they live. No one can fault the police for their inability to prevent certain crimes of opportunity, particularly when little or no warning is given. But in cases of domestic violence, warnings from prospective victims are like flares fired from a sinking ship. When seen, they must be heeded by law enforcement officers.

The tragic death of Maria Navarro on Aug. 27 after a fruitless call to the Sheriff’s emergency number seeking help focused debate on police responsibilities and service. The lawsuit filed last Wednesday against the county on behalf of her children has renewed that debate.

Complaints of poor service and inattention are not new to local law enforcement. The Los Angeles Police Department was besieged by a coalition of civic organizations a year ago demanding equal service and protection. Studies by the department indicated that it took several minutes longer to respond to 911 emergency calls in less affluent sections of Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has released no such study.

A basic service that police provide is protection. It is that service that Navarro, a Latina who was allegedly slain by her estranged husband in a converted garage in East Los Angeles, was clearly denied.

There are a variety of reasons why police resent responding to domestic-violence calls. Officers sometime feel uncertain about how to solve domestic disputes. Officers sometime view domestic complaints as one party attempting to manipulate them into punishing the other. A lack of physical signs of abuse can often diminish a victim’s credibility. Officers called in to arrest an abusive husband are sometimes attacked by both the victim and abuser. And, when both parties are injured, it is sometimes difficult to determine which individual started the fight. They are also annoyed by the reluctance of victims to follow through with prosecution.

The list of mitigating circumstances is endless. Yet it does not relieve police from their duty to investigate these matters.

Police agencies seem to have adopted a play-it-by-the-ear approach in dealing with domestic disputes. The state Justice Department mandates that all domestic violences detected by officers be described in a report. It is impossible to report the severity of a domestic dispute if no one investigates. Sheriff Sherman Block’s position that “no response” was correct in the Navarro incident says that there is no danger unless the gun is at your head.

It is obvious that equal protection cannot be ensured for this country’s citizens if we fail to adopt more comprehensive policies in dealing with domestic violence. In addition to policy amendments, there are training and organizational changes that can enhance the effectiveness of officers in dealing with domestic violence calls. One step would be to expand training curriculum for domestic violence. The majority of calls police respond to don’t involve gunplay or burglaries. In spite of this, most police training is geared toward combat situations that may arise only a few times in the careers of officers.

A second step would be the inclusion of experts and victims from battered women’s centers in the process. Women deserve an active role in shaping the training that could save their lives. Legislation should be introduced requiring treatment before chronic abusers can be released from custody. In cases of repeated life-threatening abuse or stalking of victims, the abuser should be required to register with the police agency in the jurisdiction in which the former spouse resides.

Some departments use what is called a “premise history.” A premise history is computer-stored information on a specific address. When officers receive a call to respond to a certain address, the premise history informs them of prior complaints or unusual incidents at the address.

Premise-history information is available to the dispatcher, and he or she may consider it in making a decision on sending a patrol unit on a call. Had a premise history been entered in the Navarro case, information regarding Maria Navarro’s expired restraining order, her husband’s prior incidents of violence and any serious crimes committed at the address would have been available to the dispatcher.

Police should also have the authority to issue a court summons in cases of serious conflict. The summons would require the estranged couple to make a formal appearance before a hearing officer dealing solely with spousal abuse issues. More direct long-term help could be provided in this form.

Service to victims of spousal abuse and other crimes occurring in the inner city hinge on perceptions police officers have about the residents of the area. Reshaping attitudes of officers about the poor should result in better service for the disadvantaged. Information is the best weapon against the stereotypes and cynicism that police officers bring to work with them.

It is imperative that police officers be educated to understand that crime victims have a legitimate right to service whether they live in a penthouse or a public-housing tract.