Husband must pay for beating wife
About the article
This is a digitised version of an article from The Cayman Compass's print archive. Occasionally, the digitisation process introduces transcription errors, or other problems.
See the article in its original context from August 1983.
Brought to you by
But when the unusual idea was suggested by her divorce attorney, Walker decided she had nothing to lose. On June 30, an El Cajon (Calif.) Municipal Court jury made Walker a winner, awarding her $10,000 from her ex-husband for a beating she received three years ago. The result, according to attorneys, could change the mind of some potential wife beaters. Instead of spending time in jail, attorneys point out, a husband who beats his wife may have to spend time earning money to pay off a jury award to his battered spouse. Kenneth Kilbourn, Walker's ex-husband, was never charged with battery because Walker did not file a criminal complaint against him. But the award was based on the civil court's finding that he must pay damages for the pain and suffering inflicted by a "battery with malice." "This is a logical extension of the battered women's houses and criminal charges against husbands," said Walker's 'attorney Donald Starks, who asked the jury for $90,000 in damages.
A family law specialist says the case is unique because most wife or husband battering cases are handled by the district attorney as criminal matters. The local trial lawyers association is reviewing the case for its members. In many wife-beating cases, according to police spokesman Bill Robinson, no charges are filed at all. He said if the battered spouse signs a complaint, the battering spouse is usually charged with disturbing the peace, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail and-or a $500 fine. "I think this kind of case is very unusual," said S. Michael Love, a family law specialist and vice president of the San Diego County Bar Association. "I kind of like the idea of a civil case being brought.
It's more time-consuming and difficult than a criminal. nal case, but it's worth it if the case is really there."
Love said a civil suit is more difficult to pursue than a criminal case because the battered spouse must retain and pay for an attorney, and find witnesses willing to testify to prove she deserves a monetary award. (In criminal cases, the district attorney handles the prosecution.)
After this judgment, more wives may begin suing their husbands, said Love. He said the civil suit route looks inviting because attorneys and law enforcement officials have taken a "cavalier" attitude toward wife and husband battery cases.
"When you are a judge and see very violent things like rape and murder, the fact that a husband throws his wife against the wall isn't taken so seriously," said Love.
Catherine Taylor, executive director of the San Diego Trial Lawyers Association, agreed with Love that the Walker case may encourage more battered women to sue their spouses. Right now, she said, "there aren't too many women who sue their husbands for money and win."
