All the Women I Met in Jail
harpersbazaar.com
harpersbazaar.com
my ex-boyfriend attacks me.
I call the police at midnight, hating the thought of being seen as a victim.
But they don’t see me as a victim.
I didn’t know it at the time, but California Penal Code 13701
says police have to make an arrest in domestic violence cases—me or my ex.
They choose me.
"It’s the law. I could lose my job if I don’t arrest someone"
the arresting officer insists.
I want to scream. I called for help and got taken away in cuffs.
My ex threatens to kill me and gets resources.
How is this fair?
Later, after the DA drops my charges for lack of evidence,
I learn that the law was meant to protect victims.
But gaps in officer training and the pressure to act,
often lead to rushed, flawed arrests—like mine.
I'm a little puzzled, to be frank, to see one being handled this way. There are definitely two sides to this story.
You shouldn't be. I've seen low-experience cops get soundly manipulated over and over and over. As long as a manipulative abuser gets that cop's ear first, that cop is handled.
For those times when the cop learns they'd been had - once the facts are now clear, they do not arrest the manipulator or even try to do the right thing. Not ever.
They get in their cars and go, leaving a rewarded abuser behind.
Throw in a law that mandates an arrest and they're going to arrest the person who has the least capability to embarrass them (further).
As a guy, I've already seen and experienced that no bystanders will bat an eye if a woman assaults me, and no one's going to take me seriously if I mention it after the fact, even (especially?) if I were to be injured. I have zero reason to believe the police will be any better, and in the US, they're not known for de-escalating situations, so calling them would never cross my mind anyway.
All that said, the article raises some red flags for me as well. We're only very briefly told that the author returns home from work, gets attacked by her ex-boyfriend, calls the police, and is arrested herself.
Why/how is the ex-boyfriend in her home? What precisely happened in the attack (e.g., the only detail we're given is a thrown, partially-full beer can)? What (if anything) precipitated the attack? Has there been violence between the two before?
It's quite possible the ex-boyfriend is completely at fault, she did nothing wrong, and additional detail would clear up my reservations, so I want to give the author the benefit of the doubt.
However, the tone of the rest of the piece also gives me pause, especially where she spends a bunch of time opining about the failures of the system while talking about cell mates who are obviously (and in one case, admittedly) guilty of that for which they are currently incarcerated. Bail reform is a perfectly valid issue to discuss, but juxtaposing the cellmates' bail woes against the original story only suggests the author identifies with their guilt. Perhaps that's merely poor storytelling.