Download - Internet Journal of Criminology

Internet Journal of Criminology © 2011 

ISSN 2045-6743 (Online) 

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE 

PAST AND PRESENT POLICE RESPONSE 

TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

By Andrew Scott 1 

Abstract 

The aim of the following dissertation is to critically examine, the past and present police 

response to domestic violence. Through the use of secondary data collection, the outcome of 

the investigation, proposed that up until the late 1980s, the Criminal Justice System offered 

little consideration to victims of ‘domestic violence’. Thus, numerous primary studies 

conducted by plentiful Scholars, documented there to be an ‘unconcerned’ and ‘derogatory’ 

technique, in which Police Constables tended to deal with ‘domestic disagreements’. 

Furthermore, domestic violence was shown to have not been previously comprehended a 

‘real’ crime, but, rather a private matter, which was undeserving of police time and 

resources. Therefore, this dissertation established from 1986, onwards, the essentiality for 

changes in police policy and practise, to domestic violence, was eventually embraced by the 

Home Office, and various enhancements were made. However, contemporary research is 

demonstrating there to be significant issues of this, whereby, inappropriate arrests are 

becoming customary. 

1 Dissertation submitted as part-fulfilment of a BSc in Applied Criminology (Criminal & Community Justice), 

at Huddersfield University 

www.internetjournalofcriminology.com 1

Acknowledgements 



There are a number of individuals whom I would like to thank, for their help and support both 

directly and indirectly, during the completion of this dissertation. 

Firstly, I would like to thank my project supervisor Rachel Armitage, without your 

encouragement and great listening skills this dissertation would have not been possible. 

Secondly, I would like to thank my close friends and family, whom have been very 

understanding of the stresses and strains of academia, and therefore, provided great advice 

when in most need. 

Finally, I would like to thank all of the Applied Criminology staff, whom have supported, 

advised and helped me, throughout the three years at Huddersfield University, and thus will 

never be forgotten. 


Contents 



Abstract 1 

Acknowledgements 2 

Chapter 1: Introduction 4 

Chapter 2: Methodology 6 

Chapter 3: Literature Review 11 

Chapter 4: Discussion 21 

Chapter 5: Conclusion 22 

References 23 


Chapter 1: Introduction 



Domestic violence is by no means a new phenomenon, as historically, Hui-Kyong Chun and 

Keenan (2006) suggest it is as old as recorded history itself. With origins, dating back to 

ancient Greece, and the dawn of European civilisation, henceforth, domestic violence has 

been documented in virtually all societies, in most countries, and has been legally, socially 

and culturally acceptable (Berry, 2000). 

With this in mind, domestic violence is an essential area of study, as statistically, it accounts 

for roughly 15% of all violent crime, and will involve one-in-four women, and encompass 

one-in-six men (Kershaw et al, 2000). Tragically, two women are murdered every week, as a 

result of domestic violence, accounting for an astounding 35% of all murders (Maguire et al, 

2007). Domestic violence also has the uppermost rates of repeat victimisation (Farrall, 2002). 

A widely quoted study conducted by, Stout et al (2008) highlighted that women will on 

average, have been assaulted 37 times prior, to the first police appearance. For women aged 

19-44, domestic violence remains the leading cause of morbidity, greater than cancer and 

motor vehicle accidents (Home Office, 2005). Roughly, 89% of the victims who suffer 

sustained domestic violence are women; however, it also affects the male, lesbian, gay, bisexual 

and transgender community (Newburn, 2007). Every minute in the United Kingdom, 

the police receive a call from the public for support for domestic violence, which indicates 

the police obtaining an estimated 1,300 calls each day, or over 57,000 each year (Stanko, 

2000). However, according to Dodd et al (2004), only 40.2% of actual domestic violent crime 

is recorded to the police. 

The primary purpose, of the dissertation is not concerned with, the causes of domestic 

violence, as many Scholars such as Bavnish (2004), and Miller (2001), have covered this 

aspect, of the subject in pronounced complexity. What it is therefore focused with, is the 

police intervention in incidents of domestic violence, and the circumstances neighbouring 

police policies, which administer and control that intervention, and the actions stemming 

from it. In essence, it will effectively investigate and critically examine the past and present 

police response to domestic violence. 

Generally, the police are positively perceived to be, “a key 24 hour agency”, and “perhaps the 

first port of call in an emergency”, domestic violent situation (Harwin et al, 2000, p.1991). 

This is because they offer very effective „short‟, „medium‟ and „long-term‟ interventions 

(Evans, 2009). The former, involves the police being „pro-active‟ in arresting, and captivating 

any possible offenders (Soileau, 2008). The second, compromises the police being 

tremendously „sympathetic‟ in, assessing the victims living arrangements, and asking them 

numerous domestic violence related questions (Walklate, 2007). The latter, consists of the 

police being exceptionally „resourceful‟ in, helping, supporting and investigating an 

allegation of wrong-doing (Russell-Brown, 2006). Decker and Junger-Tas (2008) 

appropriately highlight that this in essence, validates the police as being enormously, 

„professional‟ and „sensitive‟ when dealing with domestic violence. 

Yet, despite this positivity, a substantial amount of criticism mainly from Feminist writers, 

have been directed towards their response to victims of domestic violence, in particular 

analysing that, victims of domestic violence are passive recipients of police choices, rather 

than, actors, engaged in the interactive process of decision making (Hoyle, 1998). Other 

condemnations, involve the perspective that, incidents are regularly considered and treated to 

be „civil‟, rather than „criminal‟ matters, and that inadequate police recording practice, 




obscures a true picture of the extent of domestic violence (Morley and Mullender, 1994). 

Consequently, these criticisms have resulted in the victims of domestic violence, seeking 

police assistance as a last resort, and often only after repeated attacks (Smith, 1989). In the 

last decade in particular, there have been significant improvements to conflicting policy and 

practice, but much domestic violence still goes unreported (Shipway, 2004). Thus, as a result, 

the above extensive debates therefore frame the context, in which the intended area of study 

has developed. 

This dissertation will firstly commence with the methodology. It is here; that the projects 

influence will be outlined, numerous research methods will be explored and critically 

analysed, various terminology will be defined, and finally, potential ethical issues and 

debates will be deliberated. The literature review will then commence; firstly it will explore 

the inconsistencies in the definition of domestic violence, and the scepticisms, that have 

developed as a result. Then, the historical viewpoints, social acceptability, and preliminary 

legislation, will then be contemplated, before moving on to consider the bearing of Second- 

Wave Feminism, in the 1970‟s. This will thus be shadowed by the main-body and central 

theme, of this dissertation which is to, critically examine the past and present police response 

to domestic violence. This will be accomplished, by looking at fluctuations in legislation and 

police policy, with anticipation, to what influence these changes have had, on shaping 

domestic violence policy, and contemporary police practice. The review will then be 

followed, with a consultation, where the foremost findings of the study will be correlated, in 

order to ascertain, whether the review has been efficacious in its objective. A concluding 

section will then finalise the critical literature review, with a re-statement of the main 

findings. 


Chapter 2: Methodology 

Project influence 



The rationale underpinning selecting this particular field of study, originated from a great 

interest, that developed from an inspirational Domestic Violence and Victims of Crime 

Lecture, conducted on 23/03/2010, by the guest lecturer Glenda Smith, in the year two 

module, „Victims, Witnesses and Survivors‟. This lecture involved Glenda, explaining 

powerfully through a narrative viewpoint, her first-hand account of being a victim of 

domestic violence. More specifically, the attentiveness to the „police response‟ to domestic 

violence was alternatively inspired, by the work of appropriate scholars, like McGee (2000). 

Subsequently, I therefore emotively believe, it is essential that, the police should respond 

appropriately and sensitively, to incidences of domestic violence. It is this indebtedness that 

has provoked an eagerness, to explore and investigate the subject further. 

Research methods 

This section, of the project, is imperative in addressing the fundamental material used to 

accumulate and collate the information, relevant to the critical literature review. Hart (1998, 

p.28) defines the methodological section as being; “A system of methods and rules to 

facilitate the collection and analysis of data. It provides the starting point for choosing an 

approach made up of theories, ideas, concepts and definitions, for the topic”. Accordingly, 

this is positively perceived to dispense the foundations, for a „competent‟ and „efficacious‟ 

research project (Bachman and Schutt, 2010). But on the contrary, Blaikie (2010) denotes it 

as being the most difficult part. Nonetheless, before a concise explanation of the 

methodology nominated, for this critical literature review is pronounced, a more 

comprehensive definition of „criminology research‟ needs to be contemplated. 

Generally, „criminology‟ which was first coined in 1885 by Raffaele Garofalo, is defined as 

a, “specific genre discourse and inquiry, about crime that has developed in the modern 

period” (Garland, 2002, p.7). Henceforward, McShane and Williams (1998) positively 

remark upon the prominence of criminological „research‟, because it provides; the 

opportunity to research the area of unreported crime (Ashworth, 2010) it leads to an 

„appreciation‟ of the social world from the point of view of the offender, victim or criminal 

justice professional (Noaks and Wincup, 2004), and finally, it contributes to the development 

of effective policies of crime control (Cowell and Stenson, 1991). But on the conflicting, 

Hammersley (2000, p.143) situates that „all‟ criminological research can intermittently be 

„misleading‟, „bias‟ and exceptionally „subjective‟, because, “data is frequently interpreted 

and presented to favour false results”, that are in line with pre-judgements and political or 

practical commitments. 

Taking this into consideration, in order to investigate the nominated area and address the 

objectives of the dissertation, a „mixed‟ technique was implemented, which is the process, 

that integrates both quantitative and qualitative secondary data methods of crime statistics 

and victim interviews (Bryman, 2008). Thus, as numerous Scholars like, Auerbach and 

Silverstein (2003, p.22) positively perceive both, “qualitative and quantitative research as 

complementary”, the greatest unsurpassed outcomes therefore, frequently combine features 

of both positivist and interpretive paradigms (Carter and Presnell, 1994). 




Furthermore, Bryman (2004) correspondingly approves with this viewpoint, and articulates it 

to uphold different epistemological and ontological contemplations, and various perspectives 

concerning the association between theory and research, resulting overall, in „superior selfassurance 

in discoveries‟. 

Additionally, Silverman (2005) states that merging the two methods of secondary data in this 

way, is advantageous in overwhelming any intrinsic bias, of the favouring of one particular 

technique, and thus, facilitates a systematic analysis of the research, resulting in a 

strengthened reliability in the evidence presented. 

But on contrary to this positivity, it is indispensable to state, to demonstrate an 

acknowledgement of contrasting perspectives, that the epistemological assumptions, values, 

and methods of „mixed‟ techniques, can be negatively viewed to be inextricably intertwined, 

and incompatible between paradigms (Guba, 1985). This is because, as “the amalgamation is 

solely at a superficial level” (Bryman, 2008, p.604), it disregards the suppositions underlying 

research methods, and therefore transforms, qualitative inquiry into procedural variation of 

quantitative inquiry (Smith and Heshusius, 1986). 

As there were time restrictions of the project, and the scope given for the critical literature 

review was very limited, the research data „type‟ designated was secondary analysis. This is 

because, firstly, I was not in a position to conduct primary research, and secondly it was 

considered, congruently with the interpretation of Appleton and Walliman (2009) to be, more 

applicable in gratifying the research expectations and restrictions of an undergraduate 

dissertation. Although, primary research which is defined as the method of, collecting 

information specifically for the study at hand, from actual sources (Nargundkar, 2003), is 

positively seen to be, focused, with no unnecessary data collection (Nargundkar, 2008), it is 

overwhelmingly negatively perceived as, „very time consuming‟ in terms of inaugurating 

samples, and „extraordinarily expensive‟, in relation to the infinite resources needed for 

collecting and processing statistics (Carter and Thomas, 1997). Therefore, this particular 

method is vastly inappropriate for this particular project. 

Secondary data analysis, according to McGivern (2006) is defined as the, data that already 

exist in some form, which was originally collected for another purpose. This can be positively 

perceived to incorporate, more accurate and reliable information (Bryman, 2004), but on the 

contrary, has different units of measurement from those required (Hollensen and Schmidt, 

2006). Nevertheless, the „methods‟ of secondary data utilised for this project compromise of; 

Journal Articles, Internet Sources, Textbooks, Newspapers, „Women‟s Aid‟ and „Refuge‟ 

Reports and Home Office Publications. Thus, these were accumulated from the trustworthy 

source of knowledgeable „peer reviewed‟ Journals, whose data is not only more 

representative, having come from a superior array of antecedents, but moreover, is largely 

free from the above restrictions and difficulties encountered in primary data research 

(Sarantakos, 2005). Subsequently, this varied data was collected using keyword searches on 

the Huddersfield University Library Catalogue (HULC) and Google Books (GB), as well as 

adopting the „Snowball Technique‟, both of which will be successively explained in the latter 

half of this chapter. 

Firstly, Academic Journal Articles both in hard copy, and electronic form, were utilised for 

their contemporary context and reliability. Quintessential Criminological Journals by 

Hirschel and Hutchinson (1992) were initially premeditated in relation to domestic violence. 

Thus, inadequate results, however, revealed that Journal Articles relating precisely, to the 

„police response‟ to domestic violence, were negligible. Therefore, the technique had to be 




re-focused and narrowed, in order to adopt a more „police response‟ related investigation. 

This was accomplished, by reading the question and objectives of the dissertation more 

meticulously. 

Secondly, Internet Sources, which provided roughly 30% of the research basis, was exploited 

with discretion, and vigilant elimination of unscrupulously written and extreme material. 

Although, initially, there were some uncommon complications in obtaining authentic research 

material, due to, “ludicrous information and preposterous conspiracy theories, filling the 

internet” (Knight, 2003, p.348), the author viewed this as a fragment of the challenge, in 

undertaking a more unprecedented study, and thus, unswervingly responded by using 

dependable websites, such as, „www.opengovernment.com‟. 

Thirdly, after a preliminary exploration on the HULC, it was immediately apparent that there 

was a severe deficiency in published Textbooks (2 results), on the subject of domestic 

violence. Although, these books were beneficial, I alternatively used GB, to further my 

investigation. This judgement was catalytic, due to the superior arrangement of books 

accessible (212 additional results). One contemporary Textbook, which revealed to be 

tremendously worthwhile, was „Domestic Violence‟ by Danis and Lockhart (2010). 

Fourthly, Newspapers unambiguously „broadsheets‟ (Daily Telegraph), were habitually 

utilised on a weekly basis for their competency, whilst, „tabloids‟ (The Sun), were 

marginalised because of their elaborative headlines. Although, they were originally 

insufficient and irregular stories, I asphyxiated this problem, merely by purchasing another 

Newspaper (Guardian). Subsequently, this authentically was an instrumental pronouncement, 

as on average, there was 1 pertinent illustration every 2weeks, which could be crossreferenced 

into my work. 

Fifthly, Women‟s Aid and Refuge Reports were recurrently obtained once a month, through a 

direct hyperlink sent via email. Thus, these were formerly regarded as daunting, because they 

were predominantly evocative (over 180 pages long), which made it timely to unearth explicit 

material. Consequently, this was not „ultimately‟ regarded problematical, as the more reports 

I recited, the more knowledgeable I became at locating sought after information. 

Finally, Home Office Publications were expended primarily for their political and legislative 

framework. To begin with, complications ascended from the utter magnitude of the 

periodicals available, and inevitably, the technical hitches to confine the „fundamental‟ 

publications, that emerged as a result. Subsequently, this matter was abruptly resolved, by 

solely „filtering‟ through the essential publications, using the rudimentary process of „skimreading‟. 

This was effective, because it dispensed plentiful material in a small time period. 

As already momentarily suggested, it must be recollected, however, that academic books 

have to progress through the publication process, which can take time to accomplish, and 

consequently, their content may not replicate the furthermost current policy. It is this notion, 

therefore, that this project has expended a variability of supplementary methods, to convey a 

persistent reflection on contemporary issues. 

As aforementioned in this chapter, the research techniques employed throughout this review 

contained, mutually of, „keyword‟ searches and the „Snowball Technique‟. 

For the purposes here, a literature search is generally defined as, a systematic and thorough 

search of all types of published literature, in order to identify as many items as possible, that 

are relevant to a particular topic (Wilkinson, 2000). 




Accordingly, I accomplished the former, by performing searches of keywords using the 

universally recognisable „Boolean-Logic‟ method, of integrating words with „and‟, and 

correspondingly with „or‟, to constrict the search. Whereas, the latter was achieved, through 

merely following up the references from the bibliographies of the manuscripts I rehearsed. 

Terminology 

The infinite preponderance of the literature studied for this dissertation, has been engraved by 

significant Feminist writers. Therefore, what has become ostensible in the development of the 

research is the multiplicity of terminology used by Scholars, to classify „victims‟ of domestic 

violence. 

As formerly specified, there is an abundance of expressions used that denotes to domestic 

violence per se. But similarly, DeKeseredy and Hinch (1991) insinuate explicitly that the 

terms used in the United Kingdom, to categorise „victims‟ of domestic violence consist of, 

„abused women‟ and „abused wife‟s‟, whereas in the United States, phrases alike „battered 

women‟ are more palpable (Roy, 1977). Consequently, this varied universal vocabulary 

elevates both semantic and conceptual debates. 

One of these divergences clarifies that, gender-neutral terms are circumvented because they 

are too euphemistic, as in the vast majority of cases domestic violence is committed by a man 

against his female partner (Miller, 2003). 

Accordingly, this conception is extensively documented, maintained and tolerated in 

mainstream society (Home Office, 2005), and one which the project does not challenge. But, 

for the purposefulness of this dissertation, and to devoid any meaning to depoliticise the 

matter of domestic violence, when communicating generally, the countenance „victim‟ of 

domestic violence, will be used as a gender-neutral semantic replacement. This is because, 

this term is more comprehensive and acknowledges, as previously stated in the Introduction 

section, that although, women are more frequently the victims of domestic violence, it also 

affects the male, lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender community (David et al, 2006). 

With this in mind, when referring to scholarly research, I will thus be unequivocal in 

illustrating the relationships involved, so that there remains no misunderstanding, over who 

the victims and perpetrators are. Henceforth, when using the phrase „domestic violence‟ I will 

be referring to the forcefulness manifestation amongst both, existing and non-existing 

associates, whether, cohabiting or non-cohabiting, who are, or who have been encompassed 

in passionate interactions. On contrary, I will not be using the term „domestic‟ in the 

circumstance of hostility occurring between „blood-relatives‟. 

Ethical issues 

With affection to ethical discussions, Reardon (2006) accentuates it is crucial to guarantee 

that, the integrity of the „research process‟ and „ethical behaviour‟ becomes second nature to 

all researchers. Moreover, high ethical moralities must be encouraged by researchers 

generally, but principally, by those undertaking undergraduate projects (Creswell, 2009). 

With this in mind, in relation to the project, i was tremendously observant in that this region 

of research investigated, could possibly provoke various ethical issues with apprehensions of, 

confidentiality, personal privacy, personal safety, and obligations of the Data Protection Act 

1998 (Al-Hakim, 2007). Additionally, as previously stated, there are also issues of author and 

reader bias, and validity of findings that need to be documented (Newburn, 2007). Therefore, 




i intentionally employed „secondary particulars‟ so there unpretentiously were no fears of 

ethical concerns, throughout this project. 


Chapter 3: Literature review 

Domestic violence definition 



As „domestic violence‟ has not remained, “separately identified in police force statistical 

returns of recorded crime to the Home Office”, it is therefore not a legally defined offence 

(Home Affairs Committee, 2007, p.16). Accordingly, this indistinctiveness in a legitimate 

definition has patently led to the investigating of domestic violence being both challenging 

and controversial. Furthermore, Walklate (2005) fittingly appoints this is not autonomously a 

„modern-day concern‟, as Dekeseredy (2010) accredits it to be, but has been historically 

perplexing. Therefore, critical spectators have noted a lack of reliability amongst Government 

Officials, Scholars and Mainstream Society, over the relationship and types of behaviour that 

should be included under the „rubric‟ of domestic violence, and consequently, believe the 

expression should not be used (Mooney, 2000). However, the term „domestic violence‟ is 

optimistically perceived, “most favoured in policy-making areas”, because it covers all 

domestic relationships (Choudhuriit, 2008, p.16). 

Taking these debates into consideration, Riviello (2010) advocates, that regardless of a nonexistent 

legal definition, there is a recurrent all-encompassing meaning, which is helpful for 

this literature review. 

Henceforth, domestic violence is commonly defined as, “any incidence of threatening 

behaviour, violence or abuse between adults who are or have been intimate partners or family 

members, regardless of gender or sexuality” (Squire, 2009, p.115). 

Thus, this latest definition is helpful because, it is immensely exhaustive and comprehends a 

more extensive assortment of „individuals‟ (Black and Minority Ethnic Groups), and „issues 

of trepidation‟, like honour based violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage 

(Abbas and Idriss, 2011), than the preceding clarification presented by the Home Office 

(2003) which merely amalgamated adults and family members. 

In summary, by undertaking this particular definition, the above concerns expressed by 

critical advocates will be appropriately addressed, and the needs of minority groups will be 

sensitively considered. 

Historical perspective of domestic violence 

As previously outlined in the introduction section, domestic violence is by no means a new 

phenomenon, and is as old as recorded history itself (Newburn, 2007). With origins, dating 

back to ancient Greece, and the dawn of European civilisation, henceforth, domestic violence 

has been documented in virtually all societies, in most countries, and has been legally, 

socially and culturally acceptable (Elmsley, 1996). 

Furthermore, preliminary Feminist Cobbe (1878) states that these unfathomable heritages of 

violence in the „patriarchal systems‟, was at the time, however, “regarded not as a crime, but 

as a man‟s duty as the authority figure in the home”, to keep control over his wife and 

children through permissibly, whichever method necessary to accomplish contentment (Hess 

and Orthmann, 2010, p.298). 




Accordingly, this tolerance of male dominance was customarily conveyed, theatrically, 

throughout the seventeenth century (Campbell and Coote, 1987). For example, Puppet Shows 

such as „Punch and Judy‟, appropriately demonstrated, in Scene one, “Punch commencing an 

attack upon his wife” (Mayhew and Tuckniss, 1949, p.55), and Shakespearean performances 

like „The Taming of the Shrew‟, where in Act three, Scene two, „Petruchio‟ fittingly states, 

“I will be master of what is my own. She is my goods, my chattels” (McElroy, 2001, p.103). 

Legislation and police response pre 1970 

Between 1853 and 1860, there were three significant endeavours to introduce legislative 

changes, premeditatedly to „specify‟ and „regulate‟ the magnitude of force which a man could 

mandate on women and children, of which, merely one received Royal Assent (Hobson, 

2002). This was the 1953 Better Prevention and Punishment of Aggravated Assaults on 

Women and Children‟s Act (BPPAAWCA) (Bromley and O‟Malley, 1997). 

This Act, dubbed the „Good Wives‟ Rod‟ positively, “increased the maximum penalties under 

the 1828 Offences Against the Persons Act”, to £20 or six months in prison (Shilling, 2008, 

p.31), and made it attainable for a, third party witnessing an assault to bring a complaint to a 

magistrate (Surridge, 2005). 

Although despite this hopefulness, “the maximum penalties were rarely enforced”, as the Act, 

did not function straightforwardly to occurrences of domestic violence (Mooney, 2000, p.70). 

Additionally, McLynn (1989, p.36) accentuates the killing of a wife was more foreseeably, 

“to result, in manslaughter rather than a murder charge”. This is because, throughout this era, 

it was still relatively permissible under the „Rule of Thumb‟ standard, for men to use any 

mechanism to physically administer family obedience, as long as the object was no larger, 

than the thickness of the thumb (Bennett et al, 2007). 

Although, comparatively and somewhat disconcerting, during this period, it was unlawful 

under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1877 to „mistreat‟ any animal, and hitherto by divergence, 

was socially conventional to „mistreat‟ a human (Belle, 2008). Thus, it becomes especially 

worrying that over a century later, social acceptability, or moreover, „ignoring the problem‟ 

prevails, as Gould‟s (2003) survey of 1000 people which is shown in the graph below, 

discovered a staggering 78% of people questioned, would intervene if a dog was mistreated, 

whilst, barely 53% would encroach if it was their companion. 




Figure 1: Gould’s (2003) survey of 1000 people converted in to percentages 

In accumulation, it is indispensable to express promptly, that shadowing pieces of legislation 

to „BPPAAWCA‟ also permitted women to; grant a divorce on the grounds of a husband‟s 

cruelty (Divorce and Matrimonial Act, 1857) (Jordan, 2010), possess and regulate their own 

property, (Married Women‟s Property Act, 1870, 1882) (Shanley, 1989), and finally, the right 

to financial support from their husbands, (Maintenance of Wives Act, 1886) (Gibson, 1994). 

In summary, these pieces of legislation were enthusiastically perceived by Davis (2003), to 

be the start of a more enlightened and somewhat sophisticated conception of civilisation. 

However, as validated above, on meticulous assessment this representation is vastly 

multifaceted and therefore, regardless of certain undeniable advancements, control by a 

husband over „his‟ wife was permissible, and thus, „police intervention‟ in „matrimonial 

confrontations‟ was overlooked (Sievens, 2005). 

Second wave feminism 

As aforementioned, for too long society tolerated and ignored violence within a home 

(Pycroft, 2010). Thus, it was not until the 19 th century, with the manifestation of „first-wave 

feminism‟, that women commenced the difficulty to ascertain legal rights (James and Wilson, 

2007). Whereas, several alterations were accomplished, it was not before the emergence of 

„second-wave feminism‟ in the 20 th century, that equality in relationships became an 

important matter (Smith, 2008). Notwithstanding, violence against women at this time, was 

once again, employed on the governmental agenda by „activist‟ feminists, reinforced by an 

assortment of feminist „academics‟, which both highlighted the need to recognise the 

widespread problem of domestic violence and the necessity to challenge it (Hoyle, 2007). 

Typically, this sort of encouragement ordinarily leads to the Home Office providing 

recommendations through Home Office Circulars, which are implemented by Chief Police 




Constables to address a problem (Brown, 1998). However, as the commencing section will 

illustrate, this is not always the case. 

Legislation and police response post 1970 

As begun to advocate, the latter part of the 1970s, brought various pieces of legislation 

channelled towards sufferers of domestic violence (Brammer, 2007). Initially, the Domestic 

Violence and Matrimonial Proceedings Act (1976), was presented, to provide women the 

legitimacy to regulate a „matrimonial‟ dwelling, and to request for an injunction excluding a 

violent individual (Burton et al, 2007). Thereafter, the Magistrates‟ Courts Act (1978) was 

thus employed, which simplified the distribution of the „injunctions‟, “in order to protect 

married women”, whom had been subjected to physical violence (Johnson, 1985, p.5). 

Notwithstanding, these two Acts, also obligated the assistance of accompanying legislation, 

like the 1977 Housing (Homeless Persons) Act which employed a „two-strand‟ obligation on 

the Local Authority Housing Departments, to secure accommodation for individuals in 

priority need and to advise and assist others (Conway, 2003). Later still, the Matrimonial 

Homes Act (1983) also provided an alternative preference of alleviation, for persons sharing 

a domestic dwelling (Lockton and Ward, 1997). 

Although, the above Acts, were optimistically envisioned to distribute legislative resolutions, 

the method in which they were implemented, had predetermined that „battered women‟ 

sustained inadequate fortification (Sumners, 2002). This is because, they were concerned 

with „civil law‟ remedies, leaving „criminal law‟ largely unaffected (Newburn, 2007). 

Regarding more explicitly towards „police response‟ to domestic violence, one of the leading 

Home Office documents to the police was the 69/1986 Circular entitled „Violence against 

Women‟ (Home Office, 1986). This elucidated guidance, for accomplishing improved 

treatment for victims of domestic violence, whereby the police were customarily obligated to 

safeguard those concerned within „domestic disputes‟ (Kumar, 2003). Moreover, it 

correspondingly accentuated there to be a distinction between unsubstantiated and untruthful 

complaints, whereby, the former should remain recorded as crime, whilst the latter, be 

registered as „no-crime‟ (Temkin, 2002). 

Accordingly, Bourlet (1990) pessimistically contends, that this strategy was not 

acknowledged by „all‟ Chief Police Constables as being commendable, which consequently, 

neutralised its encouragement on governmental policy. But on the divergent, Freeman (1987) 

argues the Manchester Metropolitan Police Force for instance, were recognised to have 

efficiently embraced this approach, and thus Edwards (1989) further discovered that, victims 

expressively believed their prerequisites were gratified because of these modifications. 

Irrespective of this, an alternative and more challenging Circular (60/1990) dubbed 

„Domestic Violence‟ later succeeded, which was premeditated to stimulate, a more proactive 

police response to domestic violence (Home Office, 1990). This quantified that, all police 

constables occupied in circumstances of domestic violence, should regard their overriding 

precedence to be the fortification of victims and the apprehension of perpetrators (Herring, 

2007). This prominence was on certifying that, police officers were conscious of their powers 

of arrest, and that domestic violence was documented and investigated in the equivalent 

manner, as additional configurations of violent crimes (Hague and Malos, 2005). 




Henceforward, this strategy was influenced by the amalgamation of anxieties expressed by, 

the public and fundamental feminists like Pahl (1985), whom both articulated police services 

to be „inadequate‟ and „inconsistent‟, when acting on crimes amongst intimates (Adlam and 

Villiers, 2003). 

Nonetheless, Gregory and Lees (1999) positively denote, that this encouraged a more 

compellingly humanistic criminal justice system, whereby, victims are perceived as valued 

participants in the decision making process. But on the antagonistic, Ashworth (2010) 

postulates that, although, over 90% of police forces throughout the country, adopted most of 

the Home Office recommendations in their local area policies, it was not however, translated 

into practise. 

Therefore, to address this contentious and intermittently emerging matter, a recent Circular 

(19/2000) named „Domestic Violence‟ was presented (Home Office, 2000a). It achieved this, 

by employing greater prominence upon local police policy, and advocating „how‟ 

occurrences of domestic violence ought to be regulated (Izuhara, 2003). Notwithstanding, a 

second Home Office (2000b) document which was simultaneously introduced, outlined 

recommendations on a multi-agency method to policing domestic violence, an approach that 

originated from the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act (Cleaver, 2007). 

However, regardless of all these informative „endeavours‟, it was not until the „legislative‟ 

introduction of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, that victims of domestic 

violence ascertained statutory rights of protection (Brammer, 2010). This was accomplished, 

through generating two modifications to Court procedure, wherein, „Restraining Orders‟ were 

initially presented to administer acquitted defendants from undertaking specific acts, and 

secondly, Judges were given the capability to determine whether an individual is „fit to 

plead‟, by reason of insanity (Wilson, 2008). But more pertinently, two restructurings to 

„police practise‟ were also applied, whereby, „Non-Molestation Orders‟ obtained under 

section four of the Family Law Act (1996) were firstly amended, to stipulate a criminal 

sanction (5years‟ imprisonment) for nonconformity, and secondly, the act deemed „commonassault‟, 

became an arrestable offence, even without an imposed warrant (Malsch and 

Smeenk, 2005). 

In accordance, to these numerous Circulars and pieces of legislation, Anderson and Garner 

(2008) advocate that, although police „liability‟ and „control‟ over domestic violence, has not 

been debated openly in a political context, since the 1980s, it continues to be an essential 

matter. 

Thus, one of the pioneering scholars to investigate „police response‟ to domestic violence was 

Dobash and Dobash (1980), whom discovered that the police frequently showed insufficient 

empathy with victims, and inadequate commitment to addressing the problem. This is 

because police practises were characterised by animosity or at best indifference (Dobash and 

Dobash, 1992). Furthermore, the police generally received no training on domestic violence, 

and when they did the prominence was, upon „mediation‟ and preserving the „family-unit‟ 

(Burton, 2008). 

Notwithstanding, another noteworthy exploration was Edwards (1986) study, which 

uncovered a great reluctance to record domestic violence as a „crime‟, and a substantial 

quantity of domestic violence incidents were in reality „no crimed‟, by the police. Thus, 

Edwards (1987) attributed some of this unwillingness to police stereotypes, observing that the 

under-enforcement of the criminal law was affected by private attitudes regarding appropriate 

sex roles. Therefore, the legal victim does not continually turn out, from a police viewpoint, 




to be the moral victim, and the decision to arrest is influenced by the moral standpoint; that is 

to suggest by the extent to which the victim deserved it, and whether the perpetrating 

behaviour was justified (Edwards, 1989). 

Adding to this perspective, Besharov (1990) clarifies in his work that, police constables 

would attempt to mediate amongst concerned groups, or persuade victims to utilise civil 

remedies, even when they desired the perpetrator to be arrested and the police had the 

capabilities to do so. Henceforward, complainant withdrawal was the foremost purpose given 

by the police, for refusing to take legislative action against domestic violence offenders 

(Salimbeni, 2010). Essentially, police constables demonstrated insignificant identification of 

„why‟ victims might withdraw their complaints, by denoting it to the victim‟s „fickleness‟, 

rather than the apprehension of additional violence (Newburn, 2008). 

With this influx of „scholarly‟ investigations, the „Assistant Chief Constable‟ Alan Bourlet 

(1990, p.74) also conducted an enquiry, which found, “that most constables had negative 

attitudes towards matrimonial violence”, often feeling that they should not become involved. 

Furthermore, domestic violence work was proven to be detested, the preponderance of police 

constables felt insufficiently trained and were unenthusiastic to make arrests because, in their 

experience, victims withdrew their complaints (Culhane, 2011). Moreover, countless police 

constables believed that domestic violence, ought to be dealt with by other organisations, and 

thus, became exasperated at being repeatedly called to the same residence, only to have their 

recommendations overlooked (Hess, 2011). 

More contemporarily, these anxieties associated with policing domestic violence, have 

achieved a high profile, which has obligated the police, to integrate measures to minimise 

domestic violence (Chung et al, 2009). An illustration, of this is the Home Office (2006) 

campaign, which attempted to improve three quintessential domains; the investigation at call 

room, evidence collecting at the scene, and targeting of prolific offenders. 

The former encompassed, caller handlers receiving training to distinguish and undertake 

„first-line-investigation‟, throughout their conversation with victims (Humphreys and Stanley, 

2006). Thus, they used a „call taker checklist‟, so they can be prompted about appropriate 

queries, to safeguard victims and obtain evidential information (Kitaeff, 2011). 

The second, integrated dedicated „domestic violence response vehicles‟, which were 

deployed to support with effective evidence gathering (Dempsey and Forst, 2010). Moreover, 

digital images which record evidence at scenes, were also utilised, in which, some individuals 

used body-worn cameras, whilst others, left concealed cameras in homes (Cox et al, 2011). 

The latter, emphasised the necessity for police constabularies to distinguish their „high-risk 

offenders‟, in order to utilise new criminal sanctions, introduced under the above pieces of 

legislation (Buzawa and Buzawa, 2011). 

Accordingly, Burton (2008) positively denotes that any catalyst for the improvement in 

police response to domestic violence, should be embraced, given the historically incompetent 

performance, and thus, these one-off initiatives have the potential for wider impact, if good 

practise is effectively disseminated. However, the procedure of transformation is predictably 

time-consuming in the police, where, altering working regulations and police culture is not as 

simplistic, as changing official policy and guidelines (McCue, 2008). 

Taking this negative notion further, Davies (2008) observes that more recently, issues of 

„discretion‟ available to frontline staff in determining „if‟ or „how‟ they ought to deal with 




reported incidents, have emerged. Thus, the uppermost established arguments are presented 

by Anthony (2008) whom has advocated that, the significance of police discretion is due, 

partly, to the fact that, in the police organisation top-down control over policy 

implementation, through complete and flawless conventionality, is problematic. This is firstly 

because, the police are expected to deliver an assortment of amenities, and secondly, the 

extended sequences of command in police organisations, preclude intimate supervision, over 

frontline staff (Villiers, 2009). Consequently, Newburn (2008) argues this inexorableness, 

results in policy being customised or transformed by local directors and front-line staff, into 

operational practise, which formulates coherency that permits their decisions being converted 

into „street-level policy‟. In sum, implementation concerns such as this have a specific 

influence on the police response to domestic violence (Williamson, 2008). 

Reporting and Non-reporting incidents 

Domestic violence, in its extreme form, should be addressed by criminal statutes as 

contended by Brammer (2010), because characteristically, the victim is frequently conscious 

they have been attacked, the offense „if‟ reported to the police is comparatively 

uncomplicated, and no detective-work is required to determine the offender. However, 

regardless of this potential for intervention, many victims of domestic violence have 

reservations about reporting it to the police, as verified by Marcelino (2009), because they 

often believe, their complaints will be dismissed. Notwithstanding, studies focusing on Black 

Minority and Ethnic Groups, have also discovered a reluctance to record domestic violence, 

primarily because, of racist stereotypes in police culture and racist immigration legislation, 

like the 2009 Citizen and Immigration Act (Mirza, 2009). Moreover, the most up-to-date 

research on individuals, from this marginalised group, has also uncovered that they 

themselves were assaulted and threatened with arrest, when they reported domestic violence 

to the police (Caliendo and Mcllwain, 2011). 

Despite these current apprehensions, Kitaeff (2011) denotes there is still diminutive 

understanding about domestic violence, which is an area that requires comprehensive 

research, specifically, on the overall population. Furthermore, the genuine magnitude of 

domestic violence is debated by Hague and Malos (2005) to be undistinguishable, as it has 

the highest hidden figures of any crime. Additionally, statistics derived from the police, are 

unavoidably selective and incorporate merely a minor fragment of victims, which inevitably 

leads to the „hidden figure of crime‟, that is, the non-reporting of crime to the police, and the 

failure of the police, to record all the crime, that is reported to them (Byers and Hendricks, 

2006). Therefore, police figures represent simply the „tip of the iceberg‟ and in a few 

instances, reveal the limited accessibility of such resources, than the general extent of the 

issue (Mooney, 2000). 

Victimisation surveys, which incorporate questioning a selection of individuals about crimes 

committed against them, within the preceding year, have mutually made a nationwide and 

local-level contribution, to the understanding of the hidden figure of various crimes 

(Hemmens and Walsh, 2011). Although, they have their own hidden figure of non-response, 

this is greatly reduced when compared to police statistics (Hanmer and Itzin, 2000). More 

specifically, victimisation surveys for domestic violence are regularly perceived to have 

severe restrictions, in which Johnson et al (2008) proposes that, figures are repeatedly underrepresentative, 

and there are uncertainties as whether sizeable surveys covering the gamut of 

criminality, incorporates the compassion to pick-up on, all but a segment, of the entire 




incidence of domestic violence. Thus, levels of non-reporting are contemplated to be 

substantial, for reasons like fears of reprisal (Geffner and Rosenbaum, 2002). Typically, 

domestic violence is not disclosed to anybody external to the immediate family, and it is 

therefore doubtful, that victims will disclose their experiences to an uninterested interviewer, 

which is why incidence figures uncovered by these surveys are low, for illustration, 3% in the 

2008 British Crime Survey (Gough and Pycroft, 2010). 

In comparison to this, investigations by feminists have directed towards considerably higher 

figures, (up-to 15%), as they take into consideration the methodological insufficiencies of 

surveys, most perceptibly, in terms of clarifying what truly constitutes as domestic violence, 

and have engaged more ethical research techniques, like self-completion questionnaires 

(Dawes, 2004). Regrettably, this spectrum of work, has been limited by the deficiency in 

funding, and has become disapproved for the utilisation of small and biased sampling 

methods, which prevent the outcomes from being generalised to the entire population (Babbie 

and Maxfield, 2009). 

Therefore in essence, Gaines and Miller (2007) advocate that the nonexistence of 

authoritative statistics on domestic violence, eventually leads to taking pre-emptive action, to 

alleviate the issue. Thus, the North London Domestic Violence Survey (NLDVS) was 

established in response, to the requirement for enhanced information on the extent of 

domestic violence (Lockton and Ward, 1997). Thus, this constructs on feminist investigation 

perceptions, and combines it with an unsystematic survey, sizeable enough to make crosstabulations 

by age, class and ethnicity (Sigel, 2010). Fundamentally, the NLDVS is the 

largest survey focused entirely on domestic violence, in Great Britain (Siegel, 2009), which is 

why the „reported‟ incidence of domestic violence is going to be highlighted, in detail, using 

a contemporary NLDVCS. 

A 2008 NLDVCS, estimated there to be on average 1,243,000 incidents of domestic violence, 

annually, in England and Wales, which accounts for 15% of all violent crime, and will 

involve one-in-four women, and encompass one-in-six men (Marcelino, 2009). 

Catastrophically, two people are murdered every week, as a result of domestic violence, 

accounting for an astonishing 35% of all murders (Newburn, 2008). Domestic violence also 

has the uppermost rates of repeat victimisation, whereby, 57% of „all‟ victims are involved in 

more than one incident (Karmen, 2010). 

A supplementary survey to these statistics, was conducted by Thompson (2010) which 

discovered that, 38% of female domestic violence victim‟s, identified what had happened was 

„domestic violence‟ whilst, 43% regarded it as „not domestic violence‟ and 19% „did not 

know what to answer‟. However, for male victim‟s, 24% thought it was „domestic violence‟, 

whereas, 58% considered it „not domestic violence‟ and 8% „did not know what to answer‟. 

Moreover, 24% of female and 16% of male victims perceived their incident as „a crime‟, 34% 

and 30%, correspondingly, thought it was „wrong, but not a crime‟, 18% and 19% 

equivalently, viewed it as „something that happens‟, while 24% and 35% comparably, „did 

not want to answer‟ (Figure 2). 




Figure 2: Perceptions of domestic abuse: percentage of victims answering according to category, 

(Thompson, 2010). 

In summary, this chart validates that male victims are less prospectively to recognise 

domestic violence and perceive it as a crime than females, and thus, Anthony (2008) states 

this consequently, lowers reporting rates to the police therefore affecting the overall 

percentages of male victim‟s. Accordingly, Villiers (2009) clarifies this is because; females 

sustain more serious injuries than males, which makes it more likely for them to view it as 

domestic violence and a crime. 

Contemporary context 

To re-alliterate, historically, the police response to domestic violence has come under huge 

criticism, particularly, in the 1970s when feminist campaigns highlighted the police as being 

reluctant to arrest men whom assault „their‟ wives (Burrill et al, 2010). 

Therefore, from 1986 onwards, the requirement for alterations in police practise has been 

eventually accepted by the Home Office, whereby the 60/1990 Circular, undoubtedly 

indicated that domestic violence is now viewed a „crime‟ (Shipway, 2004). Thus, this 

Circular has urged police constabularies to produce „explicit force policies‟ on domestic 

violence, and establish devoted Domestic Violence Units (DVU‟s), with specially trained 

Domestic Violence Constables to manage domestic violence (Sumners, 2002). Moreover, this 

also stipulated the predominant characteristics, which should be incorporated into every 

police force policies. 

� The overriding aim is to protect victims and any children from further abuse 

� The need to treat domestic violence at least as seriously as other forms of violence 

� The use and value of powers of arrest 

� The dangers of conciliation between victims and offender 

� The need to establish recording and monitoring systems 

(Hester, 2007, p.110) 




As this table suggests, the Circular has prompted police constables of the foremost obligation, 

which is to safeguard victims and any children involved, and then, to consider appropriate 

action against an offender (Miller, 2005). Thus, immediate fortification could incorporate 

referring victims to a refuge and mediating with statutory and non-statutory organisations, for 

long-term provision (Cleaver, 2007). Furthermore, Chief Police Constables are urged to liaise 

on the application of these strategies with an assortment of agencies, like the Crown 

Prosecution Service, in order to guarantee a consistency in prosecuting domestic violence 

(Ashworth, 2010). 

More recently, in 2004, the National Modular Training Pack was introduced by the 

Association of Chief Police Officers, which outlines the expectancies of all police constables 

when arriving at a domestic violence scene (Home Affairs Committee, 2007). These are; to 

separate parties and establish whom the offender and victim are, ensure victims and children 

are safe by assessing their situation and giving medical assistance, make detailed notes on the 

whole event and gather evidence, and then report the findings back to the Investigating 

Officer, for the possibility of prosecution (Newburn, 2008). 

In accordance to these proponents of contemporary pro-arrest policies, academics like 

Newburn (2007) have argued there to be several positive features. One of which is that, the 

obligation to arrest when there is conformation that violence has occurred, clarifies the 

responsibility of the police and guarantees all victims of domestic violence suitable 

safeguards and, simultaneously prevents police biases and preconceptions (Siegel, 2009). 

Therefore, Dempsey and Forst (2010) positively state this in essence symbolises a more 

enhanced criminal justice response than decades of non-intervention. 

Although, these findings are embraced by victim scholars (Walklate, 2007), they have also 

been forcefully disapproved by unmoving critics (Siegel, 2010). Thus, Walker (2009) 

advocates these pro-arrest policies to be a „lesser preventative measure‟ than other 

interventions, because it often intensifies the incidences of future offending. Furthermore, 

Flood (2007) adds to this, by highlighting it to also eradicate police discretion, which is 

consequential because it can increase „dual arrests‟, whereby police constables arrest 

„anyone‟ to ascertain a conviction. 

In summary, the requirements for good policing practise on domestic violence, is evidently 

still an on-going debate, with various advantages and disadvantages coming to the forefront 

of many policy making decisions, which is perceived more problematic when, congruently 

with the very first observation of this literature review, that domestic violence is not a legally 

defined offence. 


Chapter 4: Discussion 



The literature review concluded that the methodology implemented to perform the review, 

was satisfactory to guarantee a comprehensive investigation. Thus, the foremost concepts that 

were highlighted in the introduction were commented upon, and linked straightforwardly to 

domestic violence. This section of the review, will deliberate precisely how the outcomes 

from the review of the literature, met the original objectives of the investigation. 

The initial aim was to, critically examine the past and present police response to domestic 

violence. It achieved this, by debating the difficulty in acknowledging and treating domestic 

violence as a „crime‟, and the responses of the police. It then, studied the historic narrative of 

social acceptance, and discussed pre and post 1970s feminist influenced policies, right up-to 

the current „pro-arrest‟ strategy. 

Therefore, the components of localism in police liability structures, has led to every police 

constabulary (43 in total), in England and Wales, adopting Home Office assessments on 

policing domestic violence. Research conducted by Elmsley (1996) discovered that, of these 

43 constabularies 22 had established DVU‟s, whilst only 4 had developed domestic violence 

policies. However, what remains worrying is that, police constables were individually 

questioned and 34% of whom revealed not recognising any new strategy and 50% did not 

receive any new recommendations. So therefore, irrespective of particular enhancements 

from an encouraging change in police policy, there remains dissimilarity in the application of 

new strategies throughout the country, which predestined that even by the latter 1990s, police 

response to domestic violence was still a „postcode lottery‟. Nevertheless, contemporary 

investigations are now demonstrating that domestic violence victims are feeling increasing 

levels of gratification (Evans, 2009). 

Accordingly, many have recently observed that rehabilitation methods, like restorative 

justice, needs to be utilised more, because it is more consistent with the needs of victims, 

whom want to „stop‟ violence rather than „punish‟ it (Brooks, 2010). However, feminists still 

argue it to legitimise male violence and eliminate victim choice (McCue, 2008). 

Therefore, the Criminal Justice System needs to increase its understanding of domestic 

violence, outside the traditional „male offender and female victim‟ representation, and to 

deliver sufficient fortification for „every‟ victim, irrespective of gender. Thus, this 

campaigning of a gender unbiased approach remains ever present, and moreover, additional 

investigations of „why‟ the overwhelming majority of males are not involved in intimate 

partner violence, is vastly essential in comprehending, what function gender really performs 

in domestic violence. Notwithstanding, while a proportioned application of an arrest strategy, 

meets the fairness principal in contemporary civilisations, its purpose to safeguard females as 

victims is effortlessly misused against them. 

In summary, the subject of police response to domestic violence incidents is meaningful 

because, the police might be responding to a victim‟s first endeavour at seeking help. Thus, 

the method the police respond to such occurrences is one that ought to be taken sincerely and 

sensitively, and therefore, the response may enable admission to professional domestic 

violence provision amenities. But on the contrary, an inadequate response might discourage 

victims from pursuing forthcoming assistance and leave the victim defenceless, and at danger 

of additional violence. 


Chapter 5: Conclusion 



This literature review has attempted to address the extensive and somewhat sensitive subject 

of domestic violence, which by its inherent character and concealed incidence, frequently 

generates incomplete and uncertain statistics. Notwithstanding, this is further made 

multifaceted by the deficiency in statutory policy requesting for statistical returns on 

domestic violence, from the police. 

Throughout the investigation period for the review, a considerable quantity of time was spent, 

in various libraries, in particular the Boston Spar British Library, where there was an 

abundance of research resources, such as, textbooks and journal articles written by wellrecognised 

academics. Therefore, this allowed the methods implemented and outlined in the 

methodology section, to prove accurate in delivering an assortment of evidence from various 

sources, allowing for a critical examination of the nominated subject and subsequently 

guaranteeing strength of information in the area of investigation. 

The main findings of the review, therefore, seem to indicate that only time and high quality 

research will categorically determine whether the Criminal Justice System, can decrease the 

incidences of domestic violence. Therefore, neither of the endeavours explained within the 

review will work effectively independently, and thus, in numerous instances, it is solely when 

information from an assortment of sources is combined, that danger to individuals can be 

distinguished and accurately measured. Furthermore, the coherent distribution of information 

about individuals involved in domestic violence, allows organisations to recognise, evaluate, 

control, and decrease the „risk‟, that is unavoidably related to such circumstances. 

Notwithstanding, the most unsurpassed research advocates that, this multi-agency practise of 

all voluntary and non-voluntary organisations in the Criminal Justice System, is fundamental 

in addressing domestic violence. And, although intimate partner violence decreased in the 

latter 1990s, so too did domestic violence. Consequently, before accrediting improvement 

exclusively to retributive criminal interventions, it must be considered with an element of 

caution. Nonetheless, various scholars, governmental officials and members of the public, 

continue to be positive that considering domestic violence as a „public crime‟ not a „private 

matter‟, will construct for a healthier and somewhat safer community. 


References 



Abbas, T, & Idriss, M. (2011) honour, violence, women and Islam. 1st ed. Oxon: Routledge. 

ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) (2008) guidance on investigating domestic 

abuse. London: ACPO NPIA. 

Adlam, R, & Villiers, P. (2003) police leadership in the 21st century. 1st ed. Winchester: 

Waterside Press. 

Al-Hakim, L. (2007) Global e-government: theory, applications and benchmarking. 1st ed. 

London: Idea Group Publishing. 

Ammerman, R, & Hersen, M. (2000) case studies in family violence. 2nd ed. New York: 

Kluwer Academics 

Anderson, T, & Garner, T. (2008) criminal law. 10th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth. 

Anthony, T. (2008) the critical criminology companion. 1st ed. Annandale: The Federation 

Press. 

Appleton, J, & Walliman, N. (2009) you‟re undergraduate in health and social care. 1st ed. 

London: SAGE Publications. 

Ashworth, A. (1998) the criminal justice process: an evaluation study. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford 

University Press. 

Ashworth, A. (2010) sentencing and criminal justice. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge 


Auerbach, C, & Silverstein, L. (2003) qualitative data: an introduction to coding and analysis. 

1st ed. New York: New York University. 

Babbie, E, & Maxfield, M. (2009) Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and 

Criminology. 1st ed. Belmont: Wadsworth. 

Bachman, R, & Schutt, R. (2010) the practise of research in criminology and community 

justice. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Baldry, A, & Winkel, F. (2008) Intimate Partner Violence Prevention and Intervention: The 

Risk Assessment and Management Approach. 1st ed. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 

Inc. 

Barnett, O, Miller-Perrin, C, & Perrin, R. (2011) Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An 

Introduction. 4th ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Barnish, M. (2004) domestic violence a literature review. [online] Available at: 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-probation/docs/thematic-dv-literaturereviewrps.pdf 

[Accessed 19th October 2010]. 

Bassiouni, C. (2008) international criminal law: sources: subjects and contents. 1st ed. 


Beech, A., Browne, K, & Craig, L. (2009) assessment and treatment of sex offenders: a 

handbook. 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. 




Belle, G. (2008) statistical rules of thumb. 1st ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 

Bennett, W., Hess, K, & Orthmann, C. (2007) criminal investigation. 1st ed. London: Thomas 

Wadsworth. 

Benson, M, & Piquero, A. (2011) Crime and the Life course: Criminology and Justice 

Studies. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Berry, D.B. (2000) The Domestic Violence Sourcebook. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Lowell House. 

Besharov, D. (1990) Family violence: research and public policy issues. 1st ed. London: 

SAGE Publications. 

Bindle, J. (2007) it‟s like saying her life was worth nothing [Online] Available at: 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/nov/16/ukcrime.gender [Accessed 2nd December 2010] 

Bird, R, & Ward, R. (2004) domestic violence, crime and victims act 2004. 1st ed. London: 

Jordan‟s. 

Blaikie, N. (2010) designing social research. 1st ed. Cambridge: Polity Press. 

Borkowski, M. (1983) marital violence: the community response. 1st ed. London: Tavistock 

Publications. 

Bourlet, A. (1990) police intervention in marital violence. 1st ed. Buckingham: Open 


Brammer, A. (2007) Social Work Law. 1st ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. 

Brammer, A. (2010) social work law. 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. 

Bromley, M, & O‟Malley, T. (1997) a journalism reader.1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Brookman, F. (2005) Understanding homicide. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Brooks, L. (2010) Restorative justice for domestic violence victims: an integrated approach to 

their hunger for healing. 1st ed. London: Lexington Books. 

Brown, A. (1998) police governance in England and Wales. 1st ed. London: Cavendish 

Publishing Limited. 

Bryman, A. (2004) social research methods. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Bryman, A. (2008) social research methods. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Burrill, E., Roberts, R, & Thornberry, E. (2010) domestic violence and the law in colonial 

and postcolonial. 1st ed. Ohio: Ohio University Press. 

Burton, F. (1996) guide to the family law act 1996. 1st ed. London: Cavendish Publishing 

Limited. 

Burton, M. (2008) legal responses to domestic violence. 1st ed. Oxon: Routledge. 

Burton, M. Bradney, A, & Cownie, F. (2007) English legal system in context. 1st ed. Oxford: 

Oxford University Press. 




Buzawa, C, Buzawa, E (2011) Responding to Domestic Violence: The Integration of 

Criminal Justice and human services. 4th ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Byers, B, & Hendricks, J. (2006) Crisis intervention in criminal justice/social service. 1st ed. 

Illinois: Charles Thomas Publishers. 

Byrom, M. (1988) Punch and Judy: Its origin and evolution. 1st ed. Norwich: DaSilva Puppet 

Books. 

Caliendo, S, & Mcllwain, C. (2011) The Routledge Companion to Race and Ethnicity. 1st ed. 

Oxon: Routledge. 

Campbell, B, & Coote, A. (1987) sweet freedom. 1st ed. Oxford: Blackwell. 

Campbell, D., Schwartz, R., Sechrest, & Webb, E., (1966) unobtrusive measures: nonreactive 

measures in the social sciences. 1st ed. Chicago: Rand McNally. 

Carrabine, E, & Lee, M. (2009) Criminology: A Sociological Introduction. 1st ed. Oxon: 

Routledge. 

Carter, K, & Presnell, M. (1994) interpretive approaches to interpersonal communication. 1st 

ed. New York: University of New York. 

Carter, Y, & Thomas, C. (1997) research methods in primary care. 1st ed. Oxon: Radcliff 

Medical Press. 

Chiarella, S. (2009) nursing and the law. 1st ed. London: Elsevier. 

Choudhuri, D. (2008) community planning for interventions for victims of domestic violence. 

1st ed. Kassel: Kassel University Press. 

Chung, D, Day, A, & Justo, D. (2009) Domestic Violence - Working with Men: Research, 

Practice Experiences and integrated responses. 1st ed. London: The Federation Press. 

Cleaver, H. (2007) Child protection, domestic violence and parental substance misuse: family 

experiences and effective practise. 1st ed. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 

Cobbe, F. (1978) wife torture in England: the contemporary view. Vol 32, April-July. 

England: Strahan and Company Limited. 

Conway, J. (2003) housing policy. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Cowell, D, Stenson, K. (1991) the politics of crime control. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 

Cox, S, McCamey, W, & Scaramella, G. (2011) Introduction to Policing. 1st ed. London: 


Creswell, J. (2009) research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 

1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Culhane, J. (2011) Reconsidering Law and Policy Debates: A Public Health Perspective. 1st 

ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 




Danis, F, & Lockhart, L. (2010) domestic violence. 1st ed. Columbia: Colombia University 

Press. 

Dantzker, M, & Hunter, R. (2006) research methods for criminology and criminal justice: a 

primer. 2nd ed. Jones and Bartlett Publishers. 

David, S., Kimmel, D, & Rose, T. (2006) lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender aging. 1st ed. 

Columbia: Columbia University Press. 

Davies, R. (2008) Domestic violence: intervention, prevention, policies, and solutions. 1st ed. 

London: CRC Press. 

Davis, W. (2003) Thomas hardy and the law: the legal presences in hardy‟s life and fiction. 

1st ed. London: Rosemount Publishing. 

Dawes, C. (2004) domestic violence: both sides of the coin. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford 


Decker, S, & Junger-Tas. (2008) international handbook of juvenile justice. 1st ed. London: 

Springer Press. 

Dekeseredy, W. (2010) contemporary critical criminology. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 

Dekseredy, W, & Hinch, R. (1991) women abuse: sociological perspectives. 1st ed. Ontario: 

Thompson. 

Dempsey, J, & Forst, L. (2010) An Introduction to Policing. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 

Dempsey, J, & Forst, L. (2010) the introduction to policing. 4th ed. Belmont: Cengage 

Learning. 

Denscombe, M. (1998) The Good Research Guide: for small-scale social research projects.1st 

ed. Buckingham: Open University Press. 

Directgov (2010) fresh action for tackling domestic violence [Online] Available at: 

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_192742 [Accessed 1st January 2011]. 

Dobash, E.R. and Dobash, R.P. (1980) Violence against wives. 1st ed. London: Open Books. 

Dobash, E.R. and Dobash, R.P. (1992) Women, Violence & Social Change. 1st ed. London: 

Routledge. 

Dodd, T., Nicholas, S., Povey, D. and Walker, A (2004) Crime in England and Wales 

2003/2004. Home Office Statistical Bulletin. 10/04. London: Research, Development and 

Statistical Directorate. 

Edwards, S. (1986) The Police Response to Domestic Violence in London. 1st ed. London: 

Central London Polytechnic. 

Edwards, S. (1987) law, domestic violence and the limits of patriarchal authority. 1st ed. 

London: SAGE. 

Edwards, S. (1989) Policing Domestic Violence. 1st ed. London: Sage. 




Eggerichs, E. (2005) love & respect: the love she most desires, the respect he desperately 

needs. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Elizabeth, L, Simon, G, & Simon F. (2008) addressing offending behaviour: context practise 

and values. 1st ed. Devon: Willan Publishing. 

Elliott, C, & Quinn, F. (2008) criminal law. 7th ed. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. 

Elmsley, C. (1996) crime and society in England. 2nd ed. London: Pearson Education 

Limited. 

Evans, N. (2009) safe, your complete guide to domestic abuse. 1st ed. Bridgend: Bullied 

Publishing. 

Farall, S. (2002) rethinking what works with offenders: probation, social context and 

desistance from crime. 1st ed. Devon: Willan Publishing. 

Faulkner, D. (2006) Crime, state, and citizen: a field full of folk. 2nd ed. Winchester: 

Waterside Press. 

Flood, M. (2007) International encyclopaedia of men and masculinities. 1st ed. Oxon: 

Routledge. 

Fond, J, & Singer, R. (2010) criminal law. 1st ed. New York: Aspen Publishers. 

Freeman, D, A. (1987) dealing with domestic violence. 1st ed. Bicester: CCH Editions. 

Gaines, L, & Miller, R. (2008) Criminal Justice in Action. 5th ed. Belmont: Thomas Higher 

Education. 

Gains, L, & Miller, R. (2008) criminal justice in action. 4th ed. Belmont: Thomas Higher 

Education. 

Garland, D. (2002) „of crimes and criminals: the development of criminology in Britain‟. 1st 

ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Geffner, R, & Rosenbaum, A. (2002) Domestic violence offenders: current interventions, 

research, and implications for policies and standards. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Geller, P., Nezu, A, & Nezu, C. (2003) handbook of psychology: health psychology. 1st ed. 

New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 

Gibson, C. (1994) dissolving wedlock. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Gough, D, and Pycroft, A. (2010) Multi-Agency Working in Criminal Justice: Control and 

Care in Contemporary correctional practise. 1st ed. Bristol: The Policy Press. 

Gould, P. (2003) scale of domestic abuse uncovered [Online] Available at: 

[Accessed 16th February 2011]. 

Grace, S. (1995) policing domestic violence in the 1990s. Home Office Research Study No: 

139. London: HMSO. 

Gregory, J, & Lees, S. (1999) policing sexual assault. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 




Guba, E. (1985) the context of emerging paradigm research. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE 

Publications. 

Hague, G, & Malos, E. (2005) domestic violence: action for change. 1st ed. London: New 

Clarion Press. 

Hamel, J, & Nicholls, T. (2007) Family interventions in domestic violence: a handbook of 

gender-inclusive theory and treatment. 1st ed. New York: Springer Publishing Company. 

Hammersley, M. (2000) taking sides in social research: essays on partnership and bias. 1st ed. 

London: Routledge. 

Haneline, M, & Meeker, W. (2010) Introduction to Public Health for Chiropractors. 1st ed. 

Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. 

Hanmer, J, & Itzan, C. (2000) home truths about domestic violence: feminist influences on 

policy and practise. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Hanmer, J. & Saunders, S. (1984) Well-founded fear: A community study of violence to 

women. 1st ed. London: Hutchinson. 

Harne, L, & Radford, J. (2008) Tackling domestic violence: theories, policies and practice. 

1st ed. London: Open University Press. 

Hart, C. (1998) doing a critical literature review. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Harwin, N., Hester, M, & Pearson, C. (2000) Making an impact: children and domestic 

violence: a reader. 1st ed. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 

Henmmens, C, & Walsh, A. (2011) Introduction to Criminology: A Text/Reader. 1st ed. 


Herring, J. (2007) family law. 1st ed. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. 

Herzog, A. (2008) Feminism Vs. Women. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Hess, K, & Orthmann, C. (2010) criminal investigation. 9th ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Hess, K. (2011) community policing: partnerships for problem solving. 1st ed. Belmont: 

Cengage Learning. 

Hester, M. (2007) making an impact: children and domestic violence. 2nd ed. London: 

Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 

Hirschel, D, & Hutchinson, W. (1992) female spouse abuse and the police response: the 

charlotte, north Carolina experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83: 73-119. 

Hobson, B. (2002) making men into fathers: men, masculinities, and the social politics of 

fatherhood. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Hollensen, M, & Schmidt, S. (2006) marketing research: an international approach. 1st ed. 

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. 

Home Affairs Committee. (2007) Domestic Violence, Forced Marriage and „Honour‟-Based 

Violence. London: Home Office. (Sixth Report). 




Home Office (1986) violence against women: Circular to the police. 1st ed. London: Home 

Office. 

Home Office (1990) domestic violence: circular to the police. 1st ed. London: Home Office. 

Home Office. (2000a) Domestic Violence. Circular to police 19/2000. London: HMSO. 

Home Office (2000b) domestic violence: breaking the chain, multi-agency guidance for 

addressing domestic violence. London: HMSO. 

Home Office (2003) safety and justice: the government‟s proposals on domestic violence. 1st 

ed. London: Home Office. 

Home Office. (2005) Domestic violence: a national report. London: HMSO. 

Home Office (2006) lessons learned from domestic violence enforcement campaigns. 1st ed. 

London: Homes Office. 

Home Office (2011) Tackling violence against women and girls [Online] Available at: 

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/media-centre/press-releases/women-and-girls [3rd May 

2011]. 

Horsbrugh-Porter, A. (2009) created equivocal: voices and women‟s rights. 1st ed. London: 

Amnesty International. 

Hoyle, C, & Sanders, A. (2000) police response to domestic violence: from victim choice to 

victim empowerment? British Journal of Criminology, 40: 14-36. 

Hoyle, C. (1998) Negotiating domestic violence: police, criminal justice and victims. 1st ed. 

Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Hoyle, D. (2007) quality management essentials. 1st ed. Burlington: Elsevier Limited. 

Hui Kyong Chun, W, & Keenan, T. (2006) New media, old media: a history and theory 

reader. 1st ed. Abingdon: Routledge. 

Humphreys, C, & Stanley, N. (2006) Domestic violence and child protection: directions for 

good practice. 1st ed. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 

Itzin, C, & Hanmer, J. (2000) home truths about domestic violence: feminist influences of 

policy and practise. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Izuhara, M. (2003) comparing social policies: exploring new perspectives in Britain and 

Japan. 1st ed. Bristol: The Policy Press. 

James, A, & Wilson, K. (2007) the child protection handbook. 3rd ed. London: Elsevier 

Limited. 

Johnson, H, Nevala, S, & Ollus, N. (2008) Violence against women: an international 

perspective. 1st ed. London: Springer. 

Johnson, N. (1985) martial violence.1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Jones, H. (1997) toward a classless society. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 




Jones, T. (2003) the governance and accountability of policing. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 

Jordan, A. (2010) love well the hour: the life of Lady Collin Campbell. 1st ed. London: 

Matador. 

Karmen, A. (2010) Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology. 7th ed. Belmont: 

Wadsworth. 

Kershaw, C., Budd, T., Kinshott, G., Mattison, J., Mayhew, P. and Myhill, A. (2000) The 

2000 British Crime Survey England and Wales. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 18/00. 

London: Home Office. 

Kitaeff, J. (2011) Handbook of Police Psychology. 1st ed. East Sussex: Routledge. 

Knight, P. (2003) conspiracy theories in American history. 1st ed. California: ABC-CLIO 

Inc. 

Kumar, A. (2003) women and crime. New Deli: Anmol Publications. 

Lockton, D, & Ward, R. (1997) domestic violence. 1st ed. London: Cavendish Publishing 

Limited. 

Loveday, B. (2000) new directions in accountability. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Maguire, M., Morgan, R, & Reiner, R. (2007) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. 4th ed. 

Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Malsch, M, & Smeenk, W. (2005) family violence and police response: learning from 

research, policy and practise in European countries. 1st ed. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing 

Limited. 

Marcelino, J. (2009) Domestic Violence: A Gender Issue? Rethinking Our Response to 

Domestic and the need to develop a more holistic approach. 1st ed. Durham: Eloquent Books. 

Mayhew, H, & Tuckniss, W. (1949) London labour and the London poor. 1st ed. London: W. 

Clowes and Sons. 

McCue, M. (2008) Domestic violence: a reference handbook. 1st ed. London: ABC-CLIO 

Inc. 

McElroy, W. (2001) individualist feminism of the nineteenth century: collecting writings and 

biographical profiles. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

McGee, C. (2000) childhood experience of domestic violence. 1st. Jessica Kingsley 

Publishers. 

McGivern, Y. (2006) the practise of market and social research: an introduction. 2nd ed. 

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. 

McLynn, F. (1989) crime and punishment in the eighteenth-century England. 1st ed. London: 

Routledge. 

McShane, M, Williams, F. (1998) criminology theory: selected classical readings. 1st ed. 

London: Anderson Publishing‟s. 




Merriman, S. (2007) Religion and the law in America: an encyclopaedia of personal belief 

and public policy. 1st ed. New York: ABC-CLIO Inc. 

Miller, J. (2003) encyclopaedia of human ecology. 1st ed. California: ABC-CLIO Inc. 

Miller, S. (2001) The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence. 7th ed. London: 


Miller, S. (2005) Victims as offenders: the paradox of women's violence in relationships. 1st 

ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Mirza, H. (2009) Race, gender and educational desire: why black women succeed and fail. 

1st ed. Oxon: Routledge. 

Mooney, J. (2000) gender, violence and the social order. 1st ed. Hampshire: Palgrave. 

Morley, R. and Mullender, A. (1994) Preventing Domestic Violence to Women. Home Office 

Police Research Group. 

Nargundkar, R. (2003) marketing research-texts and cases 2e. 8th ed. New Deli: Tata 

McGraw Hill Publishing‟s. 

Nargundkar, R. (2008) marketing research: texts and cases. 3rd ed. New Deli: Tata McGraw 

Hill Publishing‟s. 

Newburn, T. (2007) criminology. 1st ed. Devon: Willan Publishing. 

Newburn, T. (2008) handbook of policing. 1st ed. Devon: Willan Publishing. 

Noaks, L, & Wincup, E. (2004) criminological research: understanding qualitative methods. 

1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Pahl, J. (1985) private violence and public policy. 1st ed. London: Routledge. 

Paradine, K, and Wilson, J. (2004) protection and accountability: the reporting, investigation 

and prosecution of domestic violence cases. National Centre of Policing Excellence. London: 

Home Office. 

Plotnikoff, J, & Woolfson, R. (1998) policing domestic violence: effective organisational 

structures. Police research series paper 100, policing and reducing crime unit. London: Home 

Office. 

Pratt, C, & Sokoloff, N. (2005) Domestic violence at the margins: readings on race, class, 

gender, and culture. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Probert, R. (2007) family life and the law: under one roof. 1st ed. Hampshire: Ashgate 

Publishing Limited. 

Pycroft, A. (2010) multi-agency working in criminal justice: control and care in 

contemporary practise. 1st ed. Bristol: The Policy Press. 

Reardon, D. (2006) doing your undergraduate project. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Refuge (2005) refuge assessment and intervention for pre-school children exposed to 

domestic violence [Online] Available at: 




http://refuge.org.uk/cms_content_refuge/attachments/Effects%20of%20domestic%20violenc 

e%20on%20pre-school%20children.pdf [Accessed 20 December 2010]. 

Riviello, R. (2010) manual of forensic emergency medicine: a guide for clinicians. 1st ed. 

London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. 

Roberts, A. (2003) Critical issues in crime and justice. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Roy, M. (1977) battered women: a psychological study of domestic violence. 1st ed. New 

York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. 

Russell-Brown, K. (2006) protecting our own: race, crime and African Americans. 1st ed. 

Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc. 

Salimbeni, M. (2010) Law Enforcement Officers' Understanding of Domestic Violence 

Among Their Colleagues. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Sanderson, C. (2008) counselling survivors of domestic abuse. 1st ed. London: Jessica 

Kingsley Publishers. 

Sarantakos, S. (2005) social research. 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan. 

Shanley, M. (1989) feminism, marriage, and the law in Victorian England. 1st ed. New 

Jersey: Princeton University Press. 

Shilling, D. (2008) complete guide to human resources and the law. 1st ed. Aspen: Aspen 

Publishers. 

Shipway, L. (2004) domestic violence: a handbook for health professionals. 1st ed. London: 

Routledge. 

Siegel, L. (2009) Criminology. 10th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth. 

Sievens, B. (2005) stray wives marital conflict in early national New England. 1st ed. 

London: London University Press. 

Sigel, L. (2010) Introduction to Criminal Justice. 1st ed. Belmont: Wadsworth. 

Smith, B. (2008) the oxford encyclopaedia of women in world history. 1st ed. Oxford: 

Oxford University Press. 

Smith, J, & Heshusius, L. (1986) closing down the conversation: the end of quantitativequalitative 

debate among educational enquiries, Educational Researcher, 15: 4-12. 

Smith, L. (1989) Domestic Violence. Home Office Research Study 107. London: HMSO. 

Soileau, M. (2008) domestic violence: the forgotten victims. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 

Squire, C. (2009) the social context of birth. 1st ed. Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing Limited. 

Stanko, E. (2000) The day to count: A snapshot of the impact of domestic violence in the UK. 

Criminal Justice, 1: 2. 

Stout, B., Williams, B & Yates, J. (2008) Applied criminology. 1st ed. London: SAGE 

Publications. 




Strategic Partners Party (1999) current perspectives on domestic violence: a review of 

national and international literature. Federal Government of Australia, Canberra [Online] 

Available at: www.padomesticviolence.dpmc.gov.au/publications. [Assessed 16th March 

2011]. 

Sumners, R. (2002) domestic violence: a global view. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications. 

Surridge, L. (2005) bleak houses: marital violence in Victorian fiction. 1st ed. Ohio: Ohio 


Temkin, J. (2002) rape and the legal process. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Thompson, G. (2010) domestic violence statistics [Online] Available at: 

http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers/commons/lib/research/briefings/snsg-00950.pdf 

[Accessed 20th April 2011]. 

Villiers, P. (2009) police and policing: an introduction. 1st ed. Hampshire: Waterside Press. 

Walker, L. (2009) The battered woman syndrome. 3rd ed. New York: Springer. 

Walklate, S. (2005) criminology: the basics. 1st ed. Oxon: Routledge. 

Walklate, S. (2007) handbook of victims and victimology. 1st ed. Willan Publishing. 

Whitehead, T. (2011) young children suffering violence on the rise [Online] Available at: 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8458947/Young-children-sufferingviolence-on-the-rise.html 

[28th April 2011]. 

Wilkinson, D. (2000) the researcher‟s toolkit: the complete guide to practitioner research. 1st 

ed. London: Routledge. 

Williamson, T. (2008) The handbook of knowledge-based policing: current conceptions and 

future directions. 1st ed. West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons. 

Wilson, W. (2008) criminal law: doctrine and theory. 3rd ed. Essex: Pearson Education 

Limited. 

Women‟s Aid (2007) older women and domestic violence [Online] Available at: 

http://www.womensaid.org.uk/downloads/Olderwomenanddvreport(1).pdf [Accessed 10th 

January, 2011]. 

Zander, M (2000) police and criminal evidence act 1984. 1st ed. London: Sweet and 

Maxwell.

Download - Internet Journal of Criminology

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

Delete template?

Save as template?