Changing Practices: The Specialised Domestic Violence Court Process

Abstract

Specialised domestic violence courts, initially developed in the United States of America, have been recognised by other jurisdictions including Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. This article presents a case study of K Court in Toronto, drawing upon documentary evidence, direct observations and interviews with key informants. It is argued that the specialised domestic violence court process includes changing practices of some of the key stakeholders. Learning lessons from abroad can offer jurisdictions insights that can steer implementation of appropriate practices in the field.

The impact of victim advocacy on the prosecution of domestic violence offences: Lessons from a Realistic Evaluation

“…Specialist courts exist in a number of countries including the USA, Canada and Australia. In the USA in particular, these courts are well established – generally dealing with crimes such as drugs offences and domestic violence – where traditional criminal justice approaches have not necessarily been viewed as effective (Eley, 2005). There are, however, a number of different forms that specialist courts have taken – some courts deal solely with adult criminal cases, some solely with civil (or family) court issues, with others combining both civil and criminal cases.…”

Aligning policy and law? The creation of a domestic abuse offence incorporating coercive control

“…Early research into the experiences of women seeking legal protection suggested that the criminal justice system was failing both to meet the needs of victims and to hold perpetrators to account (Edwards 1989;Grace 1995;Hoyle 1998;Hester et al 2003;Parmar and Sampson 2007;Burton 2008;Hanna 2009). More recently, and in many jurisdictions, there have been important developments in the recognition of the patterns of harms of domestic abuse (Douglas 2015), alongside policy innovation (Hester and Westmarland 2005;Brooks et al 2014); legislative change (Cavanagh et al 2003;Hester et al 2008a); the establishment of dedicated courts (Cook et al 2004;Eley 2005;Hester et al 2008b); specialised training of police, prosecutors and sentencers (McMillan 2015); and the introduction of advocacy services (Robinson 2009;Howarth and Robinson 2016). Nonetheless, the ways in which the law conceptualises and responds to domestic abuse remains subject to critical scrutiny and continues to animate academic, legislative and policy debate internationally (Hester 2013;Robinson 2014;Fitzgibbon and Walklate 2016).…”

Restraining Orders following an Acquittal in Domestic Violence Cases: Securing Greater Victim Safety?

“…Where prosecutors are specifically trained in handling domestic violence cases and have chosen to undertake this specialised area, the conviction rate is enhanced and the victim experiences greater continuity where the same prosecutor handles the case throughout the process. 27 This view is also true where IDVAs are available to support the victim throughout the criminal justice process. These findings could usefully inform practice in the civil law thereby giving victims greater confidence in all branches of the legal system.…”