Saturday, May 9, 2009

More about Johanna's Murder

Historiann has a post up about the murder discussing the shift in focus from the tragedy of Johanna's death to fixation on the murderer, and analyzing what's wrong with this picture.

I'm just pissed off about the whole thing; the rationalizations, the fact that she'll likely get dragged through the mud, and somehow he'll be "misguided" and she'll be at fault (you know, for not pressing charges in '07, or "dating" him in the first place), and the lawyers will make a fortune, and she's still dead.

Did you know in CT, if you're abused by someone who doesn't live in your house, is not a family member, and whom you haven't dated (by whatever definition they have of dating), you are NOT eligible for for a restraining order? Did you know in CT that victims of stalking are not eligible for restraining orders? Did you know that in CT, emotional and mental abuse doesn't (necessarily) rate as abuse worthy of a restraining order? Did you know that restraining orders are state-specific, and enforcement across state lines is not guaranteed?

Link to womenslaw.org page on Restraining Orders.

I will say, this makes me less fearful and more angry. Which is a much more useful emotion.

1 comment:

Bavardess - said...

That info on the limitations of CT restraining laws is pretty shocking. It’s a twisted sort of logic that says you can only be harassed by someone if you are or have been in some way involved with them (could this stem from some sort of difficulty conceptualising a woman who doesn’t belong to some man??) And yes, good point about how to determine what constitutes ‘dating’.