UK: New domestic violence law will outlaw "coercive control"

Story here. Excerpt:

'A new law on domestic violence, making it illegal for someone to exercise ‘coercive control’ over their partner, will be unveiled by the Government this week.

Theresa May [link added], the Home Secretary, is expected to announce new powers allowing the police to prosecute those who are guilty of psychological and emotional abuse.

It means for the first time men who control their partners through threats or by restricting their personal or financial freedom, could face prison in the same way as those who are violent towards them.

Campaigners have long called for a change in the law to put psychological exploitation on a par with physical violence, in the hope it will encourage more victims to come forward and report abuse in the home.
...
Under the terms of the Bill a person convicted of coercive control could face up to 14-years in prison and there will be no statutory time limit for the offences, meaning abuse dating back years can be taken into account.

When similar laws were introduced in the United States it led to a 50 per cent rise in the number of women coming forward to report domestic abuse.
...
Harry Fletcher, the director of Digital-Trust, who helped worked on details of the Bill [link added] said: “Any move to criminalise coercive control without time limits will be a major step forward. It will increase victims’ confidence in the system and lead to more successful prosecutions.”'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Wow. Maybe there is more than one, but murder is the only crime I'm aware of that has no statute of limitation on prosecution here in the US. Possibly treason has no statute of limitation too, and/or maybe committing a terroristic act resulting in loss of life (murder by any other name is just as bad), but DV? Even armed robbery, attempted murder, arson, unlawful imprisonment, and torture have statutes of limitation. This law makes DV with "coercive control" an offense prosecutable any time after the alleged fact? Wow. This is like what we got now here in US colleges, with girls "charging" boys with *whatever* months, even years, after the alleged "offense".

The bill itself is jaw-dropping. The opportunities to misuse, misapply, and misinterpret/reinterpret it as desired are legion. And clause 2, para. 1 should just plain send chills down the spine of any civil libertarian:

"(1) The prosecution of any person under the terms of clause 1 (above) shall not be the subject of statutory time limits."

Remember we're not talking murder here. We're talking Person A yelling at Person B if ever so briefly twice in the course of, say, 10 years. Well, there's your "pattern", and in another 20 years, Person B, even telling the truth, still has a case. Think that's far-fetched? Not at all. Cases here in the US in states with these same kinds of fast-and-loose DV laws result in exactly those kinds of bizarre and unjust outcomes. But at least there are statutes of limitation and the scope of their damaging influence is limited to a given state/states. This law will apply all over the UK except to Scotland, which thankfully for it, has its own parliament.

And they're talking as if women are never physically, emotionally, or psychologically abusive. Holy crow, have any of the men involved in this effort ever dated more than two women in their lives?

I can't read tea leaves, but if I could, I'd say the ppl involved in creating this open-season-on-men law will come to regret it sooner rather than later. One thing's for sure: It's a major gift to the UK's divorce industry. Women wanting a Pearl Harbor-like devastating strike strategy to get their unsuspecting husbands to collapse like moored battleships under the sudden onslaught will have this no-statutory-limit law to use like armor-piercing anti-ship bombs on an otherwise quiet, uneventful Sunday morning in Honolulu.

Brace yourselves, lads! This is gonna hurt like hell! The US has already gone down this dark path and the results are in, with the outlook not getting much brighter.

Like0 Dislike0

withholding sex to get your way falls smack dab in the middle of this def. every married man gets that treatment, some more often than others.

also, if there are no time limitations, doesn't every divorced man suddenly becomes eligible for a second round of criminal or financial persecution from x-wives? they have already awarded a woman a goodly portion of a divorced man's lottery winnings, 10 years after the divorce, and after both have been remarried for years.

let's face it, women are claiming victimhood while raping men using the corrupted laws they want enacted. what a scam.

that's ok though, brit's will love sharia law when it comes. got your blanket w/ eye holes picked out yet ladies? ararar. its no wonder why they never had any voting rights. look what they do when given the chance.

Like0 Dislike0

Welcome to the UK, where women can mutilate a man's privates and walk free, but a man can't yell at his wife without facing up to 14 years in prison. Wow. I absolutely despised their so-called justice system before, but now that contempt has been squared.

What I really don't understand is how BS laws like this get passed in the first place. Are there no voices of reason left in the government? Nevermind. That was a stupid question.

Like0 Dislike0

I think this has got to be the death knell of marriage and any so called romance between the sexes.
Women can call men out at any time now,and they will,so,
mothers,if you think anything at all of your sons,warn them of the danger.
Never speak to women alone,don't even walk on the same side of the street,your life can be ruined for doing so.
It's not easy for boys,my advice is to work hard at what you're good at,and leave for foreign climes as quick as you can.
Women could stop this nonsense but they won't.Even those who call themselves non-feminists will love the control---argue with me boy,you're in clink

Like0 Dislike0

I wonder if they'll outlaw most divorce decrees, which often give women "coercive control" of their ex-husbands. "You didn't send the alimony check so I'm throwing you in jail."

Nah, it will be the other way around. "You're controlling me by not sending the check so I'm still throwing you in jail."

Like0 Dislike0