EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report explores and identifies ways in which the institutional linkages between domestic
violence service providers and members of the criminal justice community can be strengthened to
better meet the needs of domestic violence survivors. Vera House, Inc., and the Onondaga County
Assistant District Attorney’s (ADA) Office, contracted with the Maxwell School Consulting
Group (the Group) to develop a Domestic Violence Case Tracking Instrument as a data collection
tool. The proposed Instrument offers a set of data collection tools that can be implemented to
identify and evaluate factors impacting the processing of domestic violence cases. Subsequent
findings may, in turn, be used to help improve service delivery to survivors of domestic violence
as they navigate the criminal justice system.
Research Methodology
The Group utilized interviews, court observations, and document review to gather data on
how cases are handled in the legal system. This data guided the development of a set of
data collection instruments that domestic violence advocates, law enforcement agents, the
ADA’s Office, and other interested parties can use to track the flow of domestic violence
cases. An Implementation Guide was also created to provide advice for researchers using
these instruments in the field.
Research Findings and Themes
Two key themes and trends regarding the disposition of domestic violence cases in the criminal
justice system were identified. First, since there are conflicting interests between upholding the
rights of the defendant versus protecting the victim, survivors often feel that the legal system is
not designed to protect them. This in turn may lead to an avoidance or delay in seeking help.
Second, follow-through during each step of the legal process is important. However, due to
general attitudes, lack of resources, or failure to communicate among criminal justice actors,
follow-through is sometimes lacking.
Other findings of interest are as follows:
The District Attorney’s (DA) recommendation is necessary for the processing of
domestic violence cases through the criminal court system, though DA representatives
are rarely present at town and village courts;
Individual judges have varying protocols for issuing and dropping Orders of Protection;
Judges have mixed perceptions of domestic violence service providers, such as Vera
House, which is further impacted by the lack of an established relationship between most
of the courts and these agencies;
Survivors interviewed reported difficulty in understanding the criminal justice process,
including the legal terminology or procedures, which sometimes led to high levels of
distrust of the criminal justice system;
Fear of losing their children, financial insecurity, or long-term incarceration of the
batterer often prevented survivors from pursuing criminal prosecution of the batterer;
Some survivors reported that they did not feel prepared to leave the abusive relationship,
suggesting that despite referrals and other information made available, particularly by
responding police, their emotional state did not allow them to take full advantage of
available resources;
Police interviews revealed that in instances where a victim is given two conflicting
orders, (i.e. visitation and an Order of Protection) it is unclear as to which takes
precedence and how the two orders should be handled; and
T
H E
M
A X W E L L
C
O N S U L T I N G
G
R O U P
1
Court observations demonstrated that geographic location could impact the handling of
domestic violence cases (i.e. differences in judge demeanor and courtroom protocol were
observed between city courts and those located in towns and villages).
Conclusion
The following outlines important points uncovered during the process of creating the Instrument:
1. Actors within the criminal justice system report insufficient interagency communication
in the processing of domestic violence cases.
2. Survivors and criminal justice actors, particularly judges, underutilize Vera House
services due to their misperception that Vera House only provides shelter.
3. Survivors have insufficient knowledge of pertinent case information and have minimal
understanding of legal terminology and processes.
4. Inconsistencies exist in the follow-up and rendering of cases by criminal justice agencies
in the towns, villages, and the City of Syracuse.
5. Some police and judges report a need to improve or provide on-going training
opportunities to better understand the special needs of victims.
6. All interviewees report frustration with the inherent complexities of domestic violence.
7. Representatives from all interview groups struggle to reconcile the dichotomy between
protecting the interests of survivors and protecting the rights of accused batterers.
8. While potential areas for improvement have been identified, many of the law
enforcement and legal personnel agree that significant progress in this area have been
made in the past two decades.
It is the intent of The Maxwell School Consulting Group that Vera House and the DA’s Office
use the Instrument, Implementation Guide, and Research Findings to identify service delivery
breakdowns in the criminal justice system and improve service provision to those affected by
domestic violence.
T
H E
M
A X W E L L
C
O N S U L T I N G
G
R O U P
2