California’s domestic violence laws apply to crimes that are committed against one’s intimate partner. While intimidating a witness or victim is not a domestic abuse crime, it will be when the witness or victim is the intimate partner of the accused. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender intimate partners are those partners who are civilly united, living together, have children together, dating and are even those partners who used to share one of these relationships although they no longer remain a couple. Intimidating an intimate partner occurs when an individual attempts to or does convince his or her intimate partner from initiating or participating in any stage of a criminal proceeding. Depending on the circumstances involved, the individual may face either a misdemeanor or a felony.

Trial considerations are often the same in any intimate partner abuse case. Even though these considerations will apply to other areas of the law, they have unique roles in these types of cases, which is why is it necessary for the accused to have a criminal defense lawyer who is also a California domestic violence lawyer to ensure that his or her attorney is familiar with the ways in which these considerations are used in California DV trials. Evidentiary issues, such as physical evidence (including DNA evidence) and hearsay are one set of trial considerations that may frequently arise in an intimate partner intimidation case and witness issues, such as eyewitness testimony, recanting witnesses and battered person’s syndrome are another.

Physical evidence can be an easy way for a prosecutor to obtain a conviction in an intimidation case. If and when they exist, photographs or medical records revealing an injury, DNA evidence or letters or tape recordings evidencing the attempted intimidation can be quite damaging to the defense. The skilled, LGBT supportive attorneys at the Kavinoky Law Firm know the appropriate arguments to make to try to exclude this type of evidence or, at the very least, how to downplay its significance for the jury.

Hearsay evidence is generally excluded from evidence in most criminal trials but will be admissible in an intimate partner intimidation trial. This is another reason why it is critical that the defendant hires a California domestic violence attorney who will know how to effectively handle this type of evidence when most other attorneys won’t.

Eyewitness accounts can be quite helpful, even if the prosecution presented the witness, depending on the strength of the defense attorney’s examination and cross-examination skills. A good criminal defense attorney should be able to take any witness and use at least some of his or her testimony to help support the defendant’s side of the story.

Recanting witnesses are common trial considerations in D.V. cases. Recanting witnesses are witnesses who, once at trial, take back or deny their original accusations. They can be devastating to the defense if the defendant’s lawyer isn’t familiar with how the prosecution proceeds under these circumstances and if he or she doesn’t know how to appropriately respond.

Battered person’s syndrome, which has commonly been referred to as battered woman’s syndrome, will likely arise in an intimate partner intimidation trial where there has been a recanting witness. In that situation, it will be used by the prosecution against the defendant to show the jury just how abusive he or she really is.

Non-heterosexual defendants may also offer unique challenges in an intimate partner violence case. There are many legal professionals, judges and jurors who may be uncomfortable with a same sex relationship and may judge the defendant not on his or her alleged actions, but on his or her sexual identity. A GLBT defendant should make sure that his or her attorney understands these issues and knows how to effectively deal with them so that he or she receives a fair trial. The gay-friendly attorneys at the Kavinoky Law Firm have successfully defended countless DV cases and know what it takes to win! Contact them today for a free consultation and for unparalleled representation.