Some domestic violence cases are fairly straightforward. The police arrive and only one person is injured, showing that they are the victim and the other person is the aggressor.
But there are other situations in which police arrive to find that each person has their own injuries. It is clear that a physical altercation took place, and both people have cuts and lacerations, broken bones, bruising or other issues. When these mutual injuries exist, how do the police determine who to arrest?
The dominant aggressor
There are some cases in which dual arrests will take place. These are not prohibited, so they are possible when necessary. However, police policies tend to discourage them.
Instead, police officers are often asked to determine who was the “dominant aggressor” in the incident. This does not always mean the person who was the first aggressor. But it usually means the person who was the most significant when it came to exhibiting aggression toward the other – and causing physical harm.
The goal of these laws is to protect people who are themselves the victims of domestic violence. But the nuance can make things a bit complicated.
For example, due to the nature of the injuries, the police could determine that someone is the dominant aggressor and arrest them. But that person may contest that they did not want to be involved in a physical altercation to begin with. The other person attacked them, and they simply defended themselves. This defense did lead to injuries to the other individual, but they do not believe they have done anything wrong, as they do have a right to use self-defense.
Since the police are making judgment calls on the scene, and because the law includes this type of nuance, it is very important for those who have been arrested on domestic violence charges to understand all of their defense options.