Domestic violence victims celebrate prison releases
This article deals with due process for battered women who have killed their abusive partners. Many of these women were convicted years, if not decades ago, and they notice the change in the legal system. A Cheryl Orange-Jones recalls, no one in her trial: "raised the fact that I'd been battered, they just said he was the victim and I was the criminal."
Although these women were granted full due process according to the Bill of Rights; however, there are still loopholes, as this article shows. Evidence was withheld from the jury, as is shown in the case of Cheryl Jones.
I think one significant point to notice about this article is that it considers only Bay Area women. The Bay Area, as we know, is known for its liberal ideals. Although battered women are gaining rights here, it might not be true, say, in the Mid-West. A scarier thought is that if these women were not guaranteed full due process when they were tried in the Bay Area, they might have gotten less due process in other places in the US.
Justice Scalia said in his debate with Nadine Strossen (President of the ACLU) that the Bill of Rights has not always expanded upon individual rights; there have been times where the Bill of Rights has taken away rights. However, interpretation of the Bill of Rights is what truly limits and expands upon individual rights. This interpretation is also dependent on the location of the lower courts.
Local interest groups and parties create change moreso than the larger national political parties. This is also true for the US judiciary. Local courts can have more influence than the Supreme Court. For instance, these Bay Area courts are setting a strong precedent of supporting domestic violence victims.
*Note: Originally written on October 22, 2006.
