Is it increasingly common for aggressors to denounce the victim as a judicial strategy?

I have come a long way in the world of law and I can clearly say, as I have seen in recent years, that aggressors have learned a great deal. Among the strategies developed to deal with complaints against them, it is common for the defendant to also file a complaint, that is, we are increasingly seeing how the alleged perpetrator denounces the victim.

What are the reasons behind this strategy?

On the one hand, of course, it is a strategy for the judicial process. On the other hand, there is also the intention to remove the force of the victim, or to question its credibility, to generate doubts. The perversions that this can cause can be very large, to the point of distorting the whole process.

This strategy sometimes seems to produce a good result.

Many of the defendants are considered victims. The messages of the detainees are taken into account by different actors in the field of justice, who consider that they have been affected by a system that benefits women. The system shows its patriarchal basis when it starts from a complaint of interest and is on the side of man. It is clear that this benefits those engaged in this strategy, otherwise they would not continue to do so.

Are current laws adequate?

Here we have an obvious problem, because there is a law on the protection of victims, the so-called Comprehensive Law, which, although worthy of criticism, offers many effective measures. But it is not enough to have a law, it also requires a truly critical culture to understand and know how to act in the face of violence against women, a training to apply and interpret the law. Gender and feminist perspectives must be taken into account. In society, the idea has been extended that feminism is a radical ideological attitude, contrary to men. It is not to think, precisely, that feminism is considered as such, that I would consider it as a chauvinist perspective. We need feminism to have a critical view when reading the law. Because you have to be able to interpret the law, the law seems neutral, but there is nothing neutral, much less in this matter. Technical training of judges, prosecutors, lawyers, etc. It's not enough.

In the absence of training, does the area of Justice depend on the prejudices that are spreading in society?

All people involved in the process have to take into account some variables, such as that the aggressor and the victim are not usually in the same position. In the administration of justice I sometimes notice some resistance to chip change, there are prejudices in all areas. If it is not self-criticism, unfounded rumours spread to society, such as the fact that women make many false allegations. On the contrary, there are still many completely silenced forms of violence. For women it is a great effort to denounce, they do not go lightly to the court to get me I do not know what benefit. Unfortunately, by reading some sentences, it is clear that there are still some prejudices. Therefore, if the aggressor denounces the victim, it helps to strengthen these prejudices.

Can you incite women assaulted not to report?

Imagine a woman seeing that they can also be punished for domestic violence. It may be, but you have to see what is behind it, for example, to defend yourself. In these cases, he loses his trust in the judicial system. Think of what it is to denounce the aggression and, in the end, that one should be condemned and that the other party should get out of the trial. The batterer is the winner in these cases. This is another form of violence, that is, using the judicial system to commit ill-treatment.

In short, victims, in most cases, are not perfect victims as if it were a theater play or a film. You may not remember everything that has happened, that there are some contradictions, that you do not know how to explain your situation well, or that you do not present the evidence at the right time. That is the reality and many aggressors take advantage of it to put the case in their favour. They take expensive lawyers. There is asymmetry of power and that is noted in the post-denunciation process.

Do the aggressors, even as guilty in the trial, receive a lower sentence than they should, thanks to the counter-strike strategy?

Yes, it is the way to withdraw the force of the prior denunciation of ill-treatment. If there is no history or the woman has nothing denounced before, the judge might think it is a simple internal fight between the couple and the victim. Machista aggression is neglected. Some judges prefer to go down the easy road and absolve the two. On other occasions, however, the magistrate sees that both have exercised violence, and imposes the same penalty on the two defendants. Faced with this situation, many victims decide to reach an agreement, at the end of the day the aggressor and the victim are on the same level and, furthermore, the trial is not moving forward.

The ideal would be to fight, but it doesn't always happen, many prefer not to go ahead for fear of the consequences. I know more than one case in which women have been convicted of ill-treatment and yet of violence. They are not usually harsh punishments, but women are concerned: This makes you doubt what will happen to the care of your children, for example.

How can we encourage women in this situation to continue fighting?

Women must be encouraged to denounce, but they must be clearly explained what they are going to find. They must be given adequate protection, not just in the area of the law. Also in health, in psychology and in many other areas. Dealing with such a process is hard and it is important that women be prepared, it is a matter of empowerment. A political and social commitment is needed, and the victim cannot be left alone in trying to turn the situation around.

What would you recommend to an assaulted woman to have maximum guarantees in the process?

First of all, if it is a physical aggression, I would recommend that you go to the health center, that there be a testimony and, later, report. It is also essential to seek appropriate legal advice, to know what it means to denounce. In addition, it is appropriate to take care of security, denounce frequently and return home is to put us at greater risk. All those who guide women have an enormous responsibility in advising and respecting the victim’s vision. The complaint is a judicial tsunami that cannot be dealt with in any way.

But what is the way to detect false allegations for those on trial?

The fact that the alleged aggressor has lodged a complaint does not mean that it is false. He will explain the facts from his point of view, it may be that the victim has beaten the aggressor to protect himself. But we have to distinguish what the violence used for defence is. To do so, the tests must be followed, at the advice of the experts or witnesses. It is necessary to check whether the facts described in the complaint have actually occurred, sometimes it is clear that a blow or injury has only been defensive. When we know of mistreatment, it is essential to understand that it is not an isolated fact, but the result of a deeper problem. If this is not internalized, it is not easy to see who the actual victim is, what help he needs and what resources he needs to provide.