Saturday, September 03, 2011

Silly NYC DV scandal

A front page NY Times story reports about the New York City mayor:
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s management style has its hallmarks: unwavering loyalty to aides and a deep distaste for exposing private lives to public scrutiny.

So when he described the resignation of a deputy mayor a few weeks ago, Mr. Bloomberg left out a crucial detail — the aide had just been arrested over a domestic violence complaint. ...

The deputy mayor, Stephen Goldsmith, who had overseen the city’s Police, Fire and Transportation Departments, was arrested on July 30 after an altercation with his wife at their home in Washington. His wife told officers that he had shoved her and smashed a telephone against the floor.
Is this really a scandal in New York? That the major chose not to publicize a petty domestic incident involving an aide who was resigning anyway? I guess so, because the feminist DV lobby is troubled by it.
Mr. Goldsmith’s arrest, made over his wife’s strenuous objections, first became public in The New York Post on Thursday. ...

Even domestic violence experts who have worked closely with the administration and spoke glowingly of its track record on the issue said they were unsettled by the situation.

“If we are going to hold the regular people of New York City accountable for not being violent in their relationships, we need to hold our senior leaders and officials, too,” said Liz Roberts, the chief program officer at Safe Horizon, a group that has worked with the mayor to pass laws protecting victims of domestic abuse.

“It’s troubling — absolutely,” she said.
Read on for details. The paper treats this as some sort of scandal, so I can only assume that it is spinning this to make the parties look as bad as possible. Here is the story.
Based on the police report, it appears that prosecutors did not want to charge Mr. Goldsmith, because his wife did not want to pursue the case.

His arrest, according to a report released Thursday by the Washington police, stemmed from a loud and at times violent argument starting around 9:30 p.m. on a Saturday in the couple’s red-brick town house in the wealthy Georgetown neighborhood.

“I should have put a bullet through you years ago,” Margaret Goldsmith, 59, screamed at her husband, according to the report. Mr. Goldsmith then shoved her into a kitchen counter, she told the police.

Mrs. Goldsmith threatened to call the police. According to the report, she told him, “You’re not going to do this to me again.”

At that, Mr. Goldsmith grabbed the telephone and threw it to the ground, breaking it, Mrs. Goldsmith told the police. He grabbed her and refused to let her go, the report said.

Mrs. Goldsmith said she yelled, “Let me go, let me go,” and dug her nails into her husband’s forearms; when he released her, she ran to another room and called the police, the report said.

Mr. Goldsmith was arrested around 10 p.m. on a charge of simple assault domestic violence.

The Goldsmiths, in a statement released Thursday morning, confirmed the arrest but denied that they had engaged in any violence and suggested that the police report had misrepresented their behavior.

The report, Mrs. Goldsmith said, “is a summary of what discussions occurred that evening in our home, and those comments have been misconstrued as well as taken out of context.”

Mrs. Goldsmith said the arrest, which was required under Washington’s domestic violence laws, “was made over my strong objections and numerous appeals to the officers.”
There are many things wrong with this story. First, it is none of anyone's business. Second, it appears that the wife is more guilty than the husband. Third, the cops should not being arresting anyone if no one is alleging a crime. Fourth, a man should not have to lose his job over a harmless incident in the privacy of his own home. Fifth, it is not up to the NYC major to explain a trivial DC incident. Sixth, it is impossible to appease the DV feminists.

Did I miss anything? I read these stories and I think that the world has gone mad. Don't they have any real problems? Shouldn't New Yorkers be concerned with Hurricane Irene cleanup or something like that?


Anonymous said...

I agree with your comments , but want to make this point. The wife didn't realize what she was bargaining for by calling the police. It appears that many women during an argument, to gain some sort of leverage/support, jump to call the police, and find themselves, and husbands, and children in a trap that they can not escape.

When the police arrive and a wife says something like, "oh, it's not really that serious, and nothing much happened, actually." etc., the police can easily respond by saying, " if that was really the case, then why would you call the police ? You must have been threatened, harmed , in fear, etc."

I hate defending the cops but, should the cops go there, and not take action, and dismiss the episode, and later the husband seriously harms the wife, then the cops have some liability and exposure.

Had the wife felt threatened enough to call the cops, maybe she should have just left the house instead ?

Not sure, but I think I'd blame the wife a lot more than the cops for this.

George said...

I do disagree with laws that require cops to make a domestic violence arrest. Whether these arrests are justified or not, women should understand that a call to 911 can initiate a harmful chain of events that she will not be able to control. In this case, the wife's formerly high-status husband is now unemployed, and she is also suffering the consequences.

Anonymous said...

George, you once quoted some report that stated that over 85% ? of d.v. arrests during a divorce were false, or something like that right ? How many of these women were ever charged with filing a false police report later ?

There's major problems here.

Even if the woman recants to the police, the cop says " should we believe what you said when you called 911 or believe what you're telling us now. ? Should we not error on the side of caution, and do our best to protect and serve ?

No matter what the scenario, the cop is going to be inclined to cover his butt, right ?

I think women are aware through divorce attorneys, and others that "you want everything documented, etc." It will help a lot down the road if/when you decide or are divorcing and there are custody/money isssues at stake, so you too, caution on the side of error, and get all the documentaion built up as you can, or can invent.

3. Women can avoid taking much responsibility for their actions, should they like, not too. " I didn't want him arrested, it was the cops decision" although they called the cops, whether justified or not.

4. It sure serves the attorneys and court, cps, anger management class Nazi's, psych.s etc. etc. well in dragging a couple or family into the gov't control mix and money draining process of divorce, family law, and custody mess.

It gave my ex. the ability to dominate every aspect of our child custody. Personally speaking. D.V. allegations and threats of allegations were used vs. me , because any disagreement in front of our daughter, was deemed as D.V.and reported. So she'd have me wait 3 or more hours for the exchange of our daughter somewhere.
when she would then arrive deliberately, 3 hours late, I'd say what happened ? "I was worried" She'd then pick up the cell , call the cops and say that I argued with her in front of our child because she was 3 hours late. It would get reported as D.V.

But remember your story of the wife that set her husb. up to drink with the blonde ? She said something like, " I didn't do anything wrong I just had the cop nearby to observe my husb.s dangerous behavior " or something like that ?

Pretty hard to take anyone's side in this, except for the falsley accused husb/dad, and the kids that suffer.

Maybe I'm biased though. What does anyone else think ?

Aurini said...

You're all forgetting something - Primary Aggressor Laws.

Of course they arrested him; no matter how minor and insignifigant the event, no matter if it's the husband bleeding while the wife is unharmed, current standards demand that the 'party more capable of committing violence' (ie the man) be arrested.

Doesn't matter what the cops think; doesn't matter what the wife says; doesn't matter which way the evidence points.

The man is always arrested.