Three Missing Women: Thousands of Missing Men

This winter in Minnesota seemed longer than usual. The two prior winters brought above average temperatures, and we seemed to forget what winter was really like, for one.  But this winter seemed longer as well because three Minnesota families were waiting and wondering "where are our daughters?"  In its truest sense, winter is a cold, dark season.  Time seems to slow.  Perhaps nothing makes time slow more than missing a loved one.  And when that loved one is very possibly dead and waiting to be found under feet of hard Minnesota snow, the wait can only be excruciating.

I was a domestic violence survivor advocate years ago and I know that women are hurt and killed by those that claim to love them all the time.  Every few years, a news story comes around that reminds people of the tragic and deadly consequences of domestic violence.  This year is one such year.  But most cycles bring one high-profile case. This winter alone brought three. The disappearances and deaths of Kira Steger, Danielle Jelinek and Mandy Matula are not just tragedies for their families.  They are a tragedy for Minnesota. 

For those of you not familiar with these cases, Kira Steger disappeared on February 21, 2013 after a dinner with her husband.  Even as her family searched for her, Jeffrey Trevino, Kira's husband was arrested and charged with second degree murder.  After an exhaustive search, Kira's remains were discovered floating in the Mississippi River by a barge worker on May 8th.  Jeffrey Trevino's trial has been set for July 22nd.

UPDATE:  On October 3, 2013, after seventeen hours of deliberation, Jeffrey Trevino was found guilty of second degree murder without intent.  He was found not guilty of second degree murder with intent.  He did not take the stand in his own defense during the trial, but his attorney, John Conard, argued that someone else may have killed Kira; possibly someone she went to purchase drugs from, since a small amount of marijuana was found in her car.  The Honorable Leonardo Castro sentenced Trevino to 27 1/2 years in prison in November.  Kira was buried the same day that Mandy Matula's (below) body was found.

Danielle Jelinek, a twenty-seven year old Oakdale woman, disappeared on December 8th.  It is believed that Aaron Schnagl, an ex-boyfriend visited infrequently by Jelinek, was involved in her disappearance.  Her body was found in a marsh approximately three hundred feet from Schnagl's home on May 13, 2013.  Schnagl has been in jail on unrelated drug charges since before her body was discovered and is not cooperating with police.

UPDATE:  Aaron Schnagl has been charged with third degree unintentional murder in the death of Danielle Jelinek.  Prosecutors say that Schnagl caused Jelinek's death by providing her with cocaine, a type of prosecution that is becoming increasingly common in Minnesota.  Jelinek was already in custody on a previous charge and his attorney, Rachael Golderberger, says that her client maintains he had nothing to do with her death.

Mandy Matula, 24, was last seen with her ex-boyfriend David Roe on May 2, 2013.  She did not arrive to work the day after being seen with Roe.  Roe agreed to speak with police regarding his contact with Matula, but shot himself in the parking lot of the Eden Prairie Police Department.  He died the next day.  While Mandy's blood was found on Roe's jacket, she has not yet been found.  Thousands, including Kira Steger's family, continue to search for her.

UPDATE:  Mandy Matula's remains were finally found on October 27, 2013 in a wooded area Northwest of the Twin Cities in Stearns County, MN.  The remains were stumbled upon by a hiker.  The family had searched the area several times before, but because the remains were buried, they were missed.  The Matula was finally able to say goodbye to Mandy after spending so many months searching for her.  

The cluster of these cases is striking.  So too is the fact that they are but a few of many.

For all its preaching against domestic violence, our state has not put its money where its mouth is.  Such is the case with most problems.  But a person arrested for assault on a stranger faces a likely jail sentence.  Hurt a person you claim to love, on the other hand, and it's "anger management" for you.  Let's get something straight.  Domestic violence is not about anger. It is about control through violence.  People get angry all the time.  Only at home do they get to sock someone in the face and get away with it.

I've heard all the excuses from law enforcement for not following through on domestic violence cases.  First and foremost is that "the victim won't cooperate."  Last time I checked, all types of crimes are prosecuted without the victim.  When a person is murdered, while the body may yield evidence for the jury, the victim sure as hell isn't there to verbalize what happened.  Their absence doesn't stop the police from collecting all the evidence at the scene or the district attorney from presenting it.  The scene is always the best witness.  Why are domestic assault cases any different? 

Minnesota has some pretty strong statutes against domestic violence. At the same time, what a statute says and whether it is enforced are two very different issues.  When the criminal justice system doesn't prosecute cases of domestic violence, it sends the message to men that their behavior isn't really that bad.  It also sends the message to women that there really is no point in speaking up - because no one is going to protect them anyway.  I realize that the criminal justice system is already bogged down with cases.  Prosecutors and public defender offices are under-staffed and under-funded.  But, given the stakes involved with cases of domestic violence, intervening early and often must become a priority.  If it does not, we will have more Kiras, Danielles and Mandys.  Because without early intervention, these cases too often turn into homicides. 

Below are some recommendations for prosecutors and judges.

Jail time is not always the most effective means to achieve crime control, apart from keeping any particular offender off the street for a set period of time.  For example, sentence a burglar to six months in jail and the result is that that particular burglar won't burgle for six months.  The next burglar, however, well...lock your doors.  Certainly domestic violence offenders are no different.  Jail alone will not fix the problem.  However, some jail time sends the message that the crime of domestic violence is just as important to society at large as other crime.  It also keeps the victim safe as long as the offender is incarcerated.  This may afford the victim just the amount of time she needs to take action for her long term safety.  Additionally, sentencing offenders to supervised probation with strong conditions can ensure accountability.  Offenders should never be sentenced to complete "anger management."  As I said earlier, anger is not the problem.  Offenders must address family of origin issues, deeply help views and stereotypes of gender roles and the impact of violence on the other partner and children.  This type of intervention is best achieved through court ordered participation in groups specifically designed to help batterers.  Not only should the offender be required to complete such a program, but regular progress reports and check-ins, akin to what currently occurs in the drug court system, should be required. 

A particular challenge when dealing with domestic violence offenders is the often co-occurring issue of chemical dependency.  Chemical dependency is an AXIS I issue and is best dealt with before any batterer's program can intervene.  Therefore, any offender who is under the influence of alcohol and drugs at the time of the charged incident should be ordered to a Rule 25 (chemical dependency) evaluation and to treatment if appropriate.  After treatment, the offender may be better prepared to participate in a court ordered batterer's program.  While these programs may be ordered simultaneously, it is likely that, until the issue of chemical dependency is addressed, batterer intervention will be unsuccessful.

I don't want to be overly negative.  There has been progress in some parts of the Minnesota.  When I was an advocate in the nineties, I developed a method for tracking the fifty most frequently arrested offenders in the City of Minneapolis.  The hope was that the list would assist the prosecutor's office in targeting such offenders for prosecution.  I honestly am not certain whether the system is still in use.  However, in 2008 the City of Minneapolis launched a pilot program called the "Minneapolis Model."  The implementation of the Minneapolis Model led to a fifty percent increase in the misdemeanor conviction rate for domestic violence in the city between 2005 and 2010.

The Model involves collaboration between the City Attorney’s Office, the Police Department, the Domestic Abuse Project (my former employer), Casa de Esperanza and Asian Women United of Minnesota.  The City Attorney’s Office and the Police Department began collecting more evidence and evidence of a better quality when responding to domestic violence calls.

The affect of efforts made in Minneapolis have been dramatic and other municipalities would do well to emulate them.  According to the city's website, the pilot program was first implemented in the city's 5th precinct. After implementation, the conviction rate in the 5th precinct increased from 54.4 percent to 77.1 percent, bringing the total rate of convictions to 76 percent. This equates to one hundred forty one total convictions in the 5th precinct for 2008.  Because the program was so successful in the 5th precinct, the program was expanded to the four remaining precincts in the city over the next two years, resulting in an increased conviction rate in each.

Below is a list outlining conviction rate increases achieved due to the program.

5^th Precinct - 54.4 percent 77.1 percent
3^rd Precinct - 65.8 percent 73.9 percent
4^th Precinct - 58.1 percent 71.5 percent
2^nd Precinct  - 71.5 percent 84.7 percent
1^st Precinct - 70.8 percent 78.1 percent

The new investigation protocol included increased training for officers on the dynamics of domestic abuse.  It also focused on investigation techniques. Upon responding to a call, officers were asked to document defendant statements, get signed medical waivers from victims. Officers were also trained to ascertain whether there are firearms in the home, document evidence through photographs, collect  physical evidence, and obtain witness statements. Interestingly, the city reported a drop in the number of police calls from each precinct after the protocol was introduced.  Whether this drop in calls is related to an actual decrease in the number of domestic violence incidents is yet to be seen, but Minneapolis continues to collect and analyze data in order to improve not only police response, but prosecution rates as well.

So why isn't this model being followed everywhere?  Good question.  Whether the answer has to do with budgets and staffing, or attitudes and perceptions may differ depending on the jurisdiction.  Likely there is no good reason not to try it.  Perhaps those jurisdictions that have not considered it would be more inclined to do so if the public perception of domestic violence were to shift away from that of it being a "family problem" or "anger problem" toward what it truly is - a crime of violence motivated by power and control.  But shifting these attitudes is a far more difficult problem than even that of changing how the justice system responds.  To effectively shift perceptions requires understanding about where faulty perceptions are born.

Some questions that I cannot answer, but to which the answers are critical include: what gender stereotypes are taught to men about gender roles and the role of women in the family, how do men develop their perception of male power and privilege or lack thereof; and how do we as a society encourage men to support healthy behavior in relationships instead of reinforcing already disturbing attitudes toward women?  These are difficult questions because it truly is only men who know what it is to be men.  Women have always been the leaders in the anti-domestic violence movement.  No substantial lasting change can be made for the position of women in society without the co-leadership and effort of men.

Please do not misinterpret my focus on this topic as man-hating.  I am an egalitarian.  I have always been a defender of men.  My father was an example of a dedicated husband and father. In fact, he had a lot to do with teaching his girls to be strong, just as women have a lot to do with teaching boys to be strong.  But just as I could never teach my stepsons what it is to be men, my father could never teach me what it is to be a woman.  And when battering as a battle for power and control, a man certainly isn't going to look to the one to whom he tries to control for advice. 

So, before the law ever comes into play, there must be men who teach boys not to harm those they love.  This means first that men must be present.  Being present requires men to abandon the attitude that being a father means sperm donation.  It also means that women must abandon the idea that all men are pigs and we should be able to be all things to all people at all times.  Within the realm of family, men need to stop running away and women need to stop pretending men are irrelevant.   

Regardless of how women navigate their own gender roles, the men of this nation need a massive attitude adjustment.  I happen to be a woman who hangs out with mostly men (tomboy that I am). I have overheard at least several thousand conversations between men in my lifetime.  I have seen them at ease in social situations, in therapy groups and in court. I can't tell you how many times I have heard a man complain about his girlfriend or wife as though she were the worst thing that ever happened to him.  One might think that, were it not for her, he would have been guaranteed success.  Yet for some reason, he's still with her.  And he seems to be unable to see how many times she has saved his ass from himself.  Men who arm themselves with the attitude that women are generally out to get them are one bad day and an excuse away from becoming potential batterers.  The excuses for violence are many:

"She wouldn't leave me alone.  She just bitched and bitched and bitched."
"She wouldn't listen."
"She was acting like my mother."
"I was abused as a child and I just don't know how to control it."

Blah, blah, blah.

Excuse me one minute.  Imagine a scenario where you are sitting with a group of your buddies.  A debate starts up about (insert whatever here).  One of your male buddies feels particularly passionate about (whatever).  Said buddy stands up, starts waving his arms around as you tell him he is just plain wrong about (whatever).  You feel yourself getting angrier and angrier.  What do you do?  I'll tell you what you don't do.  You don't grab him by the neck and knock his head up against the wall cause he won't shut up.  Because that buddy ain't gonna let you do that and respect you in the morning.  He is also likely to whip your ass in return AND call the cops on you.  When the cops arrive, I bet they slap the handcuffs on you when you say "He wouldn't leave me alone.  He just bitched and bitched and bitched."

Not likely, if for no other reason than that your other buddies would tell you to knock if off before it even escalated so far.  So, when your buddy is sitting there telling you how much he can't stand his wife because she is a bitch - will you be the one to challenge him?  Often, our best friends are those who tell us what we need to hear instead of what we want to hear.  Much of the solution to male animosity toward women can be found in day-to-day conversations between men.  Sometimes telling someone they are screwing up is far more helpful than reinforcing that you "feel their pain."  At the very least, the national conversation about violence toward women must include the voices of more men - not just in the public arena, but in the private arena as well.  I am not going to pretend to have all the answers.  I don't even possess a comprehensive list of all the questions when it comes to this complicated issue.

I do know this.  I didn't know Kira Steger, Danielle Jelinek or Mandy Matula.  I didn't know Jeffrey Trevino, Kira's ex-husband.  Here is what I do know.  I know that I am relieved for Kira and Danielle's families that they may now properly memoralize and grieve their daughters.  I know that I pray everyday that Mandy Matula is soon found so that her family may have the same.  And I know that as the cold winter months stretched on and the searches for Kira, especially, went on but two miles from my house, I sat in my living room disturbed.  Disturbed - that somewhere under the ice, a good woman waited to be found by her family.  Hurt - that the last thing she saw was the man she had tried to love robbing her of her life.  Sad - that I am no different than she.  The only difference between victims of domestic violence and other women is the men in their lives.  And the only difference between a violent and non-violent world is the amount of effort we put into it.


Just Keepin it Real.
HKB

BTW: Below is an (incomplete) list of organizations doing good work in the area of domestic violence:

Domestic Abuse Project
Harriet Tubman 
Minnesota Men's Action Network
The Refuge Network
MN Center Against Violence and Abuse
The Men's Resource Center for Change
Minnesota Deaf Domestic Violence Program

PA v. Gosnell: Why the Media Balked

Some of you may be familiar with the case of PA v. Gosnell, the Pennsylvania abortion provider accused of multiple counts of first degree murder for the deaths of living infants and Karnamaya Mongar, 41. The doctor was found guilty of three counts of first degree murder this week for the deaths of three children.  He was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for Mongar's death. In addition to the murder charges, Gosnell was also found guilty of twenty-one counts of abortion of the unborn where the fetuses were beyond twenty-four weeks gestation.  With the verdict delivered, the case was to proceed to the penalty phase, where jurors consider evidence in mitigation and in aggravation.  Gosnell could have received the death penalty.  But according to CNN, Gosnell agreed today to forgo appeal and the prosecution has agreed to not pursue the death penalty.  But unlike the Jodi Arias trial, you haven't heard wall-to-wall coverage of this gruesome case.  You won't hear all the intimate details of how Gosnell spends money from his commissary account.  And, although you will see some media coverage of the case, you may very well only hear about the result of the penalty phase as it blips across your Twitter feed.

Why?

The case received some media attention when it first broke.  As the trial neared, however, it did not receive as much attention as one might have anticipated.  Media outlets themselves have been engaged in an argument about how much coverage the case has received.  Some have even used it as a battering ram against other media outlets.  My purpose is not to engage in the "who covered it better" debate.  I am more interested in the fact that coverage has been overall light. One might have expected ample coverage because of the sordid and graphic details outlined in the grand jury indictment.  In fact, this writer thinks the indictment is one of the most extraordinary legal documents she has ever read.  The clinic was described as a "hell hole," where women and babies were left to suffer in deplorable conditions.  The case also smelled of racial injustice, as white women were often escorted to a more sanitary upper story room while poor women of color were left to deal with deplorable conditions in the clinic's primary space.  If the allegations laid out in the indictment were found to be true, one could hardly imagine a more suitable monster story for our times.  Surely - surely the media would ride with this one.

But business is the media these days.  Because the media is really just a means for advertisers to entice "consumers," the difficult, real, human issues presented by Gosnell's actions create a real problem for media.  In the board rooms they were probably saying "we really should cover this case so we don't get gigged for ignoring it" while "too much coverage is going to turn viewers off" came out the other side of their mouths.

First, abortion is a hot button political issue and likely always will be.  Pro-choice people have been holding back the line on abortion restrictions since before Roe v. Wade.  Those who identify as "pro-life" at least believe that SCOTUS overstepped their bounds by legalizing abortion.  At most, they would say, any abortion is murder.  I often wonder how many people in this country have actually read one single Supreme Court decision, much less the Roe decision.  But that doesn't change the fact that the clash between the two sides can get uglier than a pig fight during a parade.  Who then, is surprised that this alone is enough to make the media squeamish.

Politics isn't the only reason for their queasiness. There is also the fact that many of Gosnell's victims were low-income women of color.  I would personally think this would make the case more reportable, as it is the type of scandal that can be sensationalized into higher ratings.  But upon further reflection, there are an aweful lot of people in this country who, frankly, just don't care about the poor.  People in poverty only make the news in an "if it bleeds it leads" context.  Rarely does the main stream media cover these cases from beginning to end.  What they tell you is that the crime happened.  They aren't interested in what lead up to the crime or its result. Why should this case be any different, just because it involves multiple victims.  Besides, it might even cause the masses to get all riled up...

The final reason that the Gosnell case hasn't received the coverage it deserves is because, frankly, it's not sexy.  It is, in fact, anti-sexy.  Jodi Arias has a relatively decent looking white girl from every-town America as a defendant.  Her victim, Travis Alexander, was an up-and-coming young man who was butchered in the prime of his life.  Their relationship was rocky.   Bad relationships and crazy exes are something that the average person can relate to.  Added to the fact that Arias seems to enjoy airing all the details of her sexual escapades, and you have the makings of a media darling because death sells, but sex sells better.  Gosnell doesn't appeal to the public's prurient interests.  He is an old man who was doing a job that no one wanted to think about BEFORE he crossed the legal line.  After crossing that line, he became a proverbial boogie-man-in-the-closet.  And real boogie men don't help companies sell yogurt.

Just Keepin it Real.
HKB

Air(ias) Heads

Welcome to Kennedy Cases - the new blog about criminal law authored by, well, me.  Over time you will find a wealth of opinions, links and articles about criminal cases of note, changes in law that are interesting and my opinion of media coverage of criminal cases.  While I practice in Minnesota, I will include plenty of national and high profile cases for your perusal. 

Speaking of high profile cases, I suppose it is almost incumbent upon any good blogger to comment on the rage of the day - the murder trial of Jodi Arias in Maricopa County, Arizona.  Call it what you will - feeding frenzy, sensationalist's dream, or ratings darling.  Whatever you call it, what seems to have been lost is unusual.  The first thing to get lost in the media coverage of a high profile homicide is the victim.  Not so here. After all, there are thousands of people on twitter and elsewhere on the internet that identify themselves as members of "Team Travis."  I can't remember a case since O.J. Simpson where the victim actually receives somewhere near the same amount of media coverage as the defendant, thanks in no small part to the efforts of said victim's family and friends.  God knows the media barely gives them a wink otherwise.

What has been lost in all this coverage is that THIS CASE IS JUST LIKE the thousands of other homicide cases tried in this country every year.  With one exception.  The media noticed that the defendant was messed up in the head.  And because the media noticed her - we noticed her.  Her behavior has, indeed, been bizarre.  But there is one element of the phenomenon after that "noticing" that disturbs me.

Enter defense attorney. Why does the media always use the term "justice" as a term synonymous with "conviction?"  Last time I checked, justice meant following the constitution and making sure the TRUTH comes out.  While I have followed the trial closely and believe that her conviction is warranted, the media's pounding of the term "justice" helps fuel the often misguided public distrust of our justice system.  People in this country are very patriotic, and quick to proclaim it - until a defendant they don't like is put on trial. 

Then people want to kill the defense attorneys for doing their jobs and harass expert witnesses for giving an opinion.  "Justice" is defined by the constitution in this country.  And it's a great constitution.  If a case is lost it is the Prosecutor's fault - NOT the Defense's.  And don't go telling me you want the burden of proof to be on the Defendant.  Unless, that is, you're sure you will never be arrested for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.  If you are on the "side" of the prosecution, then quit your bitching and trust them to do their job. Of course, if they don't do their job (i.e., Jeff Ashton in State of FL vs. Casey Anthony), you can always elect them as your top District Attorney.

Just keeping it real,
HKB