Strangulation and self-defence - What’s the Court’s view towards this type of DV? GRP v ABQ [2020] QDC 272
In GRP v ABQ [2020] QDC 272, there was a no contact protection order against the husband. However, the parties continued to live together following the protection order and continued to have contact with each other.
On 3 August 2019, while the husband and the wife were at home together. A verbal and physical altercation occurred. The husband packed his belongings and left the residence. The wife called the police alleging the husband physically assaulted her. The husband was charged with the following offences and remanded in custody:
Breach of a domestic violence order;
Common assault - domestic violence order; and
2 x choking suffocation strangulation - domestic relationship = domestic violence offence.
About three months later, the husband filed a private application for a protection order against the wife. The five incidents of alleged domestic violence are as follows:
On 4 November 2018, following an argument about the husband disciplining the wife’s children, the wife said to the husband, “Just because people don’t agree with you doesn’t mean they’re wrong, you’re an idiot”, That’s right you just leave when you can’t take it”, and “You’re are an idiot, this is what you do, you just run away”.
Around mid-February 2019, the wife sent a text message to her daughter which said, “just letting you know the asshole is here for the night” and “Yep, fucking asshole he is”. Following this, the wife showed the husband the text messages.
On 15 March 2019, the wife said to the husband “You are an idiot” and “you don’t care about this wedding”.
In April 2019, the wife sent the husband the following text messages: “Why don’t you love me”, “Are you still attracted to me”, “How come you’re never home”, “Why aren’t you here”, “Who are you talking to”, and “Do you have another girl on the side”.
On 3 August 2019, the wife lunged at the husband and scratched his face with her nails, causing injury to his left eye and cheek.
The trial judge refused to make a temporary protection order in favour of the husband.
The husband appealed and the appeal was allowed. The appellant judge considered incident 2 and incident 5 would constitute acts of domestic violence and said:-
Incident 2 - “I consider the incident falls within the definition of emotional or psychological abuse. The wife’s intention can only have been to torment, upset or humiliate the husband. The incident was offensive. However, this incident would not of itself be sufficient to satisfy me a TPO should be made.”
Incident 5 - The evidence of physical injury showed the wife had committed domestic violence. Although the wife as most in need of protection, the husband is entitled to a protection order.
Notes: This is a case back in 2020. In 2023, amendments of section 4(2)(e) of the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act has provided that only 1 domestic violence order protecting that person should be in force unless, in exceptional circumstances, there is clear evidence that each of the persons in the relationship is in need of protection from the other.
If you would like to discuss your family law case, please make an appointment with us today.
Reference: GRP v ABQ [2020] QDC 272