TELEMASP Bulletin, Volume 6, Number 5, August/September 1999 Page: 4
This periodical is part of the collection entitled: Texas State Publications and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Vol. 6, No. 5, August/September 1999
Based on the results of this survey, it appears that jurisdictions
served by small and medium size police departments are
continuing the national trend where the number of homicides
by intimates decreased from 1976 through 1996 (Greenfield
et al. 1998).When examining thenumberofoverallhomicides
in Texas during 1998, an increase occurred from 1997 after
experiencing a drop since 1991 (Texas Department of Public
Safety 1999). The increase in family violence homicides
reported by large police departments may have contributed
to the increase in overall homicides in Texas during 1998.
This, however, does not explain the increase in family
violence homicides reported by the large departments in
1997.
Agency Use of Victim's Advocates
Often the victim of family violence fears increased retaliation
and violence when the offender is released following an
arrest; therefore, contact with a victim's advocate can provide
information concerning alternatives, available services, and
protective orders to avoid continued violence (Goolkasian
1986). As the criminal justice system has become more
aware of the need for these services, advocates are engaged
to support victims. Eleven of the responding agencies
employ a full-time victim's advocate who is responsible for
contacting every family violence victim when a written
report is made (see Table 1). Of those departments without
a full-time victim's advocate, 17 refer victims to an advocate
located outside the department. It is important to note that
five departments without a victim's advocate do not refer
victims to one outside the department. This points to the
need for greater collaborative working relationships between
law enforcement and victim service providers.Table 1
Availability of Crime Victim's Advocate
Does a victim's advocate contact every family violence
victim when a written incident is made?
Yes 11
No 22
No Response 1
If yes, is this advocate a full-time employee of the
department?
Yes 10No
1
Is this victim's advocate a state-designated "Crime
Victim's Liaison"?
Yes 8
No 3
If your department does not have a full-time victim's
advocate, is one available elsewhere to refer victims.
Yes 17
No 5
procedures were reported. This suggests that having a "no
drop"policy may streamline decision-making and, therefore,
may also reduce departmental liability by limiting the
alternatives available to individual employees and creating
a departmental position concerning victims' requests to drop
charges.No Drop Policies
When police officers chose mediation or separation as the
preferred action at family violence incidents, the victim
would often refuse to press charges or would request that
they be dropped once the victimperceived thattheimmediate
danger had passed. To remove the burden of requiring that
the victim file charges, and possibly not follow through,
policies were adopted that held the state-not the victim-
responsible for filing criminal charges. This procedure also
makes it clear to offenders that the state treats family
violence as a crime.
Although Texas law enforcement agencies are not required
to adopt a "no drop" policy, the majority (56%) of responding
departments have written procedures. As reflected in Table
2, there is less variation in decision-making among
departments having "no drop" policies, with the vast majority
(74%) referring requests to the district attorney's office. In
departments without a "no drop" policy, numerous possibleProtective Orders
For protective orders to be fully enforced, a network must be
established and maintained between the police department
and appropriate courtroom personnel (Buzawa & Buzawa
1996). In Texas, the legislature has taken steps to enhance
protective orders and collaboration between law enforcement
and court personnel. Most recently, these include: (1) the
development of a standard format for protective orders so
that they are concise and easily understood by peace officers
attempting to enforce the order (Texas Legislature 1999d);
(2) increasing the duration of emergency protective orders
issued by magistrates from 30 to 60 days (Texas Legislature
1999c); (3) increasing the magistrate's responsibility to
suspendalicensetocarry aconcealedhandgunifaprotective
order related to family violence has been issued (Texas
Legislature 1999b); and (4) increasing the maximum time,
from 24 hours to a period not to exceed 48 hours, that a
magistrate can order a person to be held after bond is posted
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View two pages within this issue that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Ahmad, Janice & Mullings, Janet L. TELEMASP Bulletin, Volume 6, Number 5, August/September 1999, periodical, August 1999; Huntsville, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1624669/m1/4/?q=%22%5B1990..%5D%22: accessed August 15, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.