‘Just Say Goodbye’ (January 2013 online edition)

Recommendations

Info

DVRCV Discussion Paper No. 8However, Justice Curtain said that even though Ramazan had been violentto Rachelle during their relationship, ‘She was fundamentally well disposedtowards you. She was cooperating with you and had recently permitted you tohave overnight access to Yazmina, and it appears she was prepared to encourageyour relationship with her.’ 53There are three key intertwined themes evident in Ramazan Acar’s case whichare considered below:• intimate partner violence• anger towards intimate partner and desire for revenge in relation to separation• using the child/ren to hurt their mother.Intimate partner violenceA history of violence towards the intimate partner was documented in RamazanAcar’s case. 54 When Ramazan and Rachelle separated in September 2010,Rachelle obtained an intervention order on the basis that Ramazan had ‘madethreats towards her and giving evidence of previous harassment and fears forher safety and that of her daughter’. 55Justice Curtain, in sentencing Ramazan Acar, stated that the relationshipbetween him and Rachelle was marked by his ‘jealousy, possessiveness, violenceand drug use’. 56 She outlined two incidents in which Ramazan was convictedin relation to assaulting Rachelle. The first incident occurred in 2006, whenhe stabbed himself and threatened Rachelle by holding a knife to her throat.Ramazan was convicted of unlawful assault, threat to kill, threatening seriousinjury and criminal damage in relation to that incident. 57 In 2009, Ramazanwas convicted of recklessly causing injury for an incident in which he hitRachelle. 58 In 2009, Ramazan participated in a program directed at male familyviolence.Anger about separationRamazan Acar’s anger towards his ex-partner in relation to their separationis evident in his phone calls and texts to her on the day he killed Yazmina.While in custody, Ramazan told a psychiatrist, Dr Danny Sullivan, that heremembered a feeling of rage when he went towards Yazmina with the knife.Dr Sullivan referred to witness statements which described Ramazan as53 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 61)54 These incidents were outlined in Ramazan Acar’s sentencing because they are prior convictions the Judge takesinto account when sentencing.55 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 2).56 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 2).57 He was sentenced to three months wholly suspended for two years.58 For this offence he was sentenced to two months wholly suspended for 12 months.40
‘Just Say Goodbye’domineering, aggressive and entitled’ in his relationship with Rachelle. 59 Atthe sentencing hearing, the prosecution described Ramazan as an angry man,consumed with hatred for his former partner and that this hatred had overtakenany thought of the welfare of the child. 60Using the child/ren to hurt the motherIt is apparent that Ramazan Acar intended to hurt his ex-partner by killingtheir child. In sentencing Ramazan Acar, Justice Curtain said ‘You committedthis murder for the worst possible motives: revenge and spite. You killed yourdaughter to get back at her mother. You used your daughter, an innocentvictim, as the instrument of your overarching desire to inflict pain on yourformer partner’. 61One or more of these three factors – intimate partner violence, angerregarding separation and killing the child/ren to hurt the mother – are evidentin each of the following cases in this chapter.Intimate partner violence in filicideAs outlined in Chapter 3, research indicates that violence against an intimatepartner is a factor in many filicides. However, few studies have explored theimpact and role that prior partner violence plays in filicides. This may bebecause homicide research generally focuses on the nature of the relationshipbetween the perpetrator and the victim who is killed. It is also the case that filicidestudies are often quantitative and rely on information from official recordsthat may be of limited value in relation to the history of intimate partnerviolence.Carolyn Johnson’s qualitative research provides valuable insights into theissue of intimate partner violence and the limitations of existing research.Johnson’s (2005) study of fathers who killed their children in the context ofseparation in Western Australia (outlined in Chapter 3) involved speakingto family survivors of the filicides. Johnson found that a history of violencewas a significant factor in all the cases for which she was able toascertain information about the couple’s relationship before the filicide (2005).In six of the seven cases there was evidence of prior violence against thechildren’s mother. Most of the women were subject to death threats fromtheir partner and one woman was shot but survived. The relationships werecharacterised by male dominance and control, and all the men were described59 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 49).60 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 58).61 R v Acar [2011] VSC 310 (para 61).41
Page 1 and 2: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Parents who k
Page 3 and 4: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Parents who k
Page 5 and 6: CASE STUDY Gary Bell 49CASE STUDY P
Page 7 and 8: Chapter 1IntroductionIn January 200
Page 9 and 10: ‘Just Say Goodbye’are also kill
Page 11 and 12: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Outline of th
Page 13 and 14: ‘Just Say Goodbye’• 6 per cen
Page 15 and 16: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Separation: A
Page 17 and 18: ‘Just Say Goodbye’While the foc
Page 19 and 20: ‘Just Say Goodbye’women as the
Page 21 and 22: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Killing intim
Page 23 and 24: ‘Just Say Goodbye’section). Giv
Page 25 and 26: ‘Just Say Goodbye’children are
Page 27 and 28: ‘Just Say Goodbye’perpetrators
Page 29 and 30: ‘Just Say Goodbye’the relations
Page 31 and 32: ‘Just Say Goodbye’male and fema
Page 33 and 34: ‘Just Say Goodbye’studies show
Page 35 and 36: ‘Just Say Goodbye’parents’ se
Page 37 and 38: ‘Just Say Goodbye’fathers that
Page 39 and 40: Chapter 4‘Suffer for the rest of
Page 41: ‘Just Say Goodbye’with him whil
Page 45 and 46: ‘Just Say Goodbye’the media in
Page 47 and 48: ‘Just Say Goodbye’According to
Page 49 and 50: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Sonia: The fi
Page 51 and 52: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Gary BellIn J
Page 53 and 54: ‘Just Say Goodbye’In the follow
Page 55 and 56: ‘Just Say Goodbye’‘Kill them
Page 57 and 58: ‘Just Say Goodbye’described him
Page 59 and 60: ‘Just Say Goodbye’It appears th
Page 61 and 62: ‘Just Say Goodbye’the time they
Page 63 and 64: ‘Just Say Goodbye’to do so by h
Page 65 and 66: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Conclusion: T
Page 67 and 68: ‘Just Say Goodbye’that fits the
Page 69 and 70: ‘Just Say Goodbye’the event, he
Page 71 and 72: ‘Just Say Goodbye’‘Samantha
Page 73 and 74: ‘Just Say Goodbye’her ex-partne
Page 75 and 76: ‘Just Say Goodbye’one from Japa
Page 77 and 78: ‘Just Say Goodbye’the incident,
Page 79 and 80: ‘Just Say Goodbye’The patterns
Page 81 and 82: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Recognising t
Page 83 and 84: ‘Just Say Goodbye’In contrast t
Page 85 and 86: ‘Just Say Goodbye’Legal respons
Page 87 and 88: ‘Just Say Goodbye’It is importa
Page 89 and 90: ‘Just Say Goodbye’The VSRFVD ha
Page 91 and 92: ‘Just Say Goodbye’about what pr
Page 93 and 94:
‘Just Say Goodbye’Summary of ke
Page 95 and 96:
APPENDICESTable A3: Gender and age
Page 97 and 98:
Appendix 2Referral informationNatio
Page 99 and 100:
REFERENCESBagshaw, D, Brown, T, Wen
Page 101 and 102:
REFERENCESFish, E, McKenzie, M and
Page 103 and 104:
REFERENCESMeyer, C and Oberman, M (
Page 105:
REFERENCESVictorian Child Death Rev
show all

‘Just Say Goodbye’ (January 2013 online edition)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?