This site is copyrighted, supported, and maintained by the Equal Justice Foundation.
| EJF Home | Join the EJF | Comments? | Get EJF newsletter | Newsletters |
| DV Home | Abstract | Contents | Tables | Index | Bibliography |
| Chapter 12 — Stories Of Violent Women And Abused Men In Colorado |
| Next — Violent Colorado women-1998 |
| Back — Stories of abused men |
Stories here are reproduced under the Fair Use exception of 17 USC § 107 for noncommercial, nonprofit, and educational use.
Wife of Colorado's first territorial governor attempts to stab him in the heart
Jealous Denver woman shoots man and his wife
Girlfriend attacks boyfriend, he is arrested and convicted
Boy makes false allegations against stepfather in defense of his mother
Town manager convicted of domestic violence after wife becomes abusive
Attorney represents husband, then her new boyfriend against DV charges
Man arrested in his bedroom at 2 A.M. after sister-in-law calls police
Woman slaps ex-husband, he is convicted
Man thrown in jail for taking food to his child
Wife hits husband over head with a bottle, he is arrested
Former Marine disarms wife, he is arrested
Man sells off business while wife goes insane
Alleged abuse victim attacks new boyfriend
Man suffering from Alzheimer's disease arrested for felony domestic violence
Ex-girlfriend harasses ex-boyfriend over telephone, he goes to jail
Abstracted from story by Tom Noel, The Denver Post, October 12, 2009
President Abraham Lincoln appointed his friend William Gilpin as the first governor of Colorado Territory in 1861. Gilpin had been part of the armed guard that escorted Lincoln to Washington after his election and helped protect the president in the White House as hostilities mounted, soon sparking the Civil War.
After the Civil War started Gilpin single-handedly raised troops with which he planned to win the Civil War for President Lincoln. He did achieve something no Colorado governor has ever done since — he stopped invading Texas Confederates at the Battle of La Glorietta Pass.
But by raising and equipping a Union army without Washington's approval, Gilpin also lost his job. He was dismissed in 1862 after Washington was inundated with his I.O.U.s for guns, horses and soldiers' salaries. He was replaced by John Evans, an even closer political pal of President Lincoln.
William Gilpin remained a public figure in Colorado and in 1874 he married Julia Pratte Dickerson. After their marriage they settled into a fine two-story Italianate style house at 1743 Champa Street It was not a happy home.
Julia's devout Catholicism verged on the obsessive, while William, raised a Quaker, grew irreligious. Determined to save her husband's soul, Julia gave generously of his money and of his property to Catholic causes, including St. Joseph's Hospital. William did not appreciate the gestures made on his behalf.
Quarrels over politics, religion, child rearing, and Julia's extravagance led to separation in 1887. Once Julia became so agitated that she tried to plunge a paper cutter into her husband's heart. He took to employing bodyguards.
Their relationship remained rocky until his death from heart failure in 1894. Julia buried him in Mount Olivet Catholic Cemetery, having gotten in the last word.
August 8, 1901 — Mrs. Phillip Hitchcock, wife of a prominent railroad man, today shot and seriously wounded James W. Roberts and his wife in their candy store. The woman was shot in the face and the man received two bullets, one in the middle of the forehead. It was at first thought the man was killed, but at the hospital he revived, and the physicians hope for the recovery of both. Jealousy, it is said, was the cause of the shooting.
A man in his thirties was living with his girlfriend. Admittedly, drugs and alcohol were a problem with this couple. One evening she came at him with a kitchen knife, and the police were called. Despite the fact that she repeatedly told the police that she had gone after him with the knife, he was arrested and convicted for domestic violence.
For Cowling Investigations the case began in 1987 with a telephone call from a mother in Colorado who said she was married but separated. She claimed her nine-year-old son from a previous relationship had been sexually abused by his stepfather while they were living in Arizona and she wanted proof.
The investigator went to Colorado and spent a great deal of time with the mother and her son. There were police agencies involved in Arizona and in Colorado, but no arrests had been made. The young boy had successfully passed a lie detector test stating that he had been abused and was seeing several counselors, who were also convinced he had been sexually molested.
The boy's mother had lived in Arizona where she worked as a singer with a band at a resort. It was there she had met her husband. After he showered her with money and promises of furthering her career, she married him, leaving her resort job with little notice.
The family moved to Colorado and shortly thereafter he left her. She was left with no job and all the promises made to her vanished.
The investigator took the time to get to know the mother and child and helped her get a job.
After spending quite a bit of time with her son, especially while she worked evenings, the investigator developed a close enough relationship with the boy that the child felt comfortable talking to him.
There was no pressure on the boy, or any questions regarding the alleged abuse, but one night as they were sitting at the kitchen table playing a game, the boy looked up and said, “ You know it didn't happen, don't you?” The investigator said he didn't know and asked the boy if he wanted to talk about it.
The boy began by telling about how his mother married “that man,” speaking with a great deal of hatred. Then, crying, he continued by saying that he and his mother had moved to Colorado with “him” and almost immediately thereafter, he left them. The boy said it hurt his mama and she cried a lot.
One night, as he watched, she stood in the utility room where her washing machine was, crying and beating the washer and dryer with a hammer. He had never seen his mother behave like that and knew “that man” caused it. All the boy could think about after that was hurting the man who had hurt his mother, so he told her his stepfather had molested him.
The investigator and the boy talked about it for quite a while, after which they drove over and picked his mother up from work. When they arrived back home, they all sat down and the investigator explained that her son had something he wanted to tell her.
The boy broke down crying and told his mother that he had lied. She was speechless and asked him, “How could you do this to me?”
The investigator explained to her how the boy had been hurt witnessing his mother's pain and anger, and that the boy was striking back because of his love for her. More importantly, she was told that she could thank God her child had not been molested. She calmed down and appeared to accept it.
The following day, driving to the airport, the mother asked what she should tell her mother. She was told to tell the truth and to explain why the boy had made the accusations. The investigator left feeling very good that the problem had worked itself out and that a young boy had not been molested.
But that relief was short lived. The following day he received a telephone call from the mother. She was hysterical. She told him he was a fraud, said that her son had been molested, said she wanted her money back and told him he would be hearing from her attorney. She abruptly hung up without allowing him a chance to offer any response or ask any questions.
Shortly thereafter the investigator received a letter from a Colorado attorney threatening him with everything from fraud to extortion and demanding that the fees received be returned. In return, the attorney was advised to do whatever he felt he needed to do, and that he had been given only one side.
The fact is her son was never molested. When he told his mother he had lied it was a source of extreme embarrassment for her. As a result she pressured the boy until he had no choice other than to return to his original story that implied the now-distant investigator was a fraud.
However, the woman finally realized her son had not been molested. In the end she reconciled with the very man her son claimed had sexually molested him.
That young boy was never molested, yet he convinced a polygraph examiner, several investigators, and several therapists that he had been.
One of the polygraph examiners who tested the boy had stated that the boy did have problems with the test but he attributed that to nervousness. The polygraph examiner stated flatly that he was not concerned about the test results, and that he was positive the boy was not lying because being sexually abused was not something a 9-year old would lie about.
Fortunately for the stepfather, during the investigation Arizona and Colorado were arguing over who had jurisdiction. Before the stepfather could be charged the allegations were shown to be false through thorough and informed investigation, a step all too frequently omitted in the hysteria of charges of sexual abuse.
The lesson is that careful investigation should always be undertaken in such cases. Particularly when young children are involved. The facts are unlikely to resemble the charges made in the first rush of hysteria, or the vindictive actions of a woman who has been wronged. Also, when someone is told they are a victim, it is likely they will start behaving like one in preference to admitting their own role in the situation.
The town manager of a Colorado ski town was arrested and convicted of domestic violence when he had to restrain his wife after she became intoxicated and abusive at a casino.
An attorney tells of how he represented both the husband, and later, the boyfriend of a woman who sequentially accused both husband and then, later, her new boyfriend of domestic violence. After her former husband was found innocent, he recommended the attorney to her new boyfriend.
Another attorney relates the story of a man who pushed his wife during an argument. She then called her sister, who in turn phoned the police. Under current law, the police must respond to all such complaints, and an arrest is mandatory. In the meantime, the couple kiss and make up, then go to bed.
On the basis of such hearsay, at 2 AM, the police came into the house and bedroom and arrested the husband. Such arrests and forced entry require no warrant under current law.
Have you ever known your wife or girlfriend to push you in anger?
Do you feel that it was a matter for police intervention or of interest to the courts. And to base warrantless arrests on hearsay places us back in Salem, Massachusetts.
This story begins in 1990 with a divorce action in Denver District Court before Judge Lynne Hufnagel. She pulled the couple's lawyers into her chambers and gave them the outcome before hearing testimony. Before court convened, she told the participants what was going to happen.
In a very rare move, she was later removed from the bench for many such arbitrary and capricious actions as this.
Judge Hufnagel awarded the wife $844 per month in child support, $2,950 in “back” child support, and $750 a month in alimony for 3 years. The understanding was that the alimony was for her to go to school and achieve her LPN license. The wife didn't bother with school, however. After he challenged his ex-wife in court about not going to school, the judge said the alimony was for school, or whatever she wanted to do with the money!
Two years later, in 1992, the father had the kids every other weekend from Friday after school/day care until Monday morning, when he would take them to school. On a Sunday afternoon, during one of his visitation weekends, she came over and said she was taking the kids. He said no. She then called the police and slapped him as she was taking their daughter out the back door and to the police department. He didn't touch her and offered to take a polygraph test but the lawyers said it wouldn't matter.
As a result of her actions, both of them had to spend a night in jail. As it turned out, however, his court date came first. As a result, he ended up with a domestic violence conviction. The woman never even had to go to court.
During 1998 a man spent some months in jail because his two-year old daughter was left alone by their mother for days with an 11-year old she had from a previous relationship while she was off enjoying herself. She had previously taken out restraining orders against him and he was convicted of domestic violence for hitting a wall in her presence. But the 11-year old called him one night and told him they had been left alone for two days, they were frightened, didn't know where Mommy was, and that there was no food. What man would not try to help his child in such circumstances? So he took food to them and helped them as best he could. He was gone long before she finally came home, but when the children told her he had been there, she had him arrested for violating the restraining orders. Since then she has been in trouble several times for violence, including incidents at the children's school, and he may eventually get custody. But those months in jail, and the emotional turmoil, are his forever. And what of the impact on the children? Or the legal costs?
An upper middle-class man tells of his brother's abusive wife who has repeatedly had him arrested. In one incident she hit him over the head with a bottle and then called the police. He was standing there with a bleeding head when the police arrived and she is untouched. The police arrested him.
The wife held a gun to her husband's head during an argument. A former Marine, he quickly disarmed her. But in doing so he chipped one of her teeth. When the police arrived, he was the one arrested. Fortunately for him, the wife did not even show up at the trial, and he eventually ended up with custody of the children.
One man watched his wife going crazy, but managed to sell off his business, and clear up his financial affairs before she came after him with a butcher knife. She has since spent time in a mental institution. Is that what is meant by “domestic violence”? As a nation we have lost the ability to deal with insane behavior by women, preferring to simply blame males for the ills of humanity. Assigning blame does not fix the problem.
A woman claimed to have been physically abused and stalked by former partners. However, one night she was fondling her new partner and squeezed his testicles so hard he was on medication for two months to relieve the inflammation. She then went back with one of her former partners whom she claimed had previously been abusing her.
A Colorado Springs public defender related a story of a 70-year-old man suffering from Alzheimer's disease who became agitated when he went into his garage and couldn't find his car.
He reportedly kept hollering: “Where's the car! Where's the car!” while shaking his arms in the air. In an attempt to calm him, his 74-year-old wife grabbed his wrists. Seeing the struggle, and hearing the commotion, a neighbor called the police.
The police then arrested the man for felony assault on a protected person (his wife because of her age) involving domestic violence. He spent four days in jail before the situation could be straightened out.
Guy broke up with his girlfriend in Douglas County in late 2004. Three months later he started dating someone else. That infuriated the ex-girlfriend so they started fighting over the phone and leaving each other nasty messages. Cell phone records show that she called him hundreds of times, some mornings every minute until he answered the phone. Of course she kept recordings of all their conversations. While Guy never threatened her in any way he naively neglected to keep any of her phone messages.
In February 2005 Guy was arrested on a variety of charges including domestic violence. After spending well over $100,000 on grossly incompetent attorneys, Guy eventually pled guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was sentenced to 30 days in jail and four years probation together with the usual 36-week redfem propaganda “DV treatment” program.
A competent attorney would have insisted on a jury trial and the charges would almost certainly have been dismissed or he would have been acquitted at trial in this “he said/she said” case.
| EJF Home | Join the EJF | Comments? | Get EJF newsletter | Newsletters |
| DV Home | Abstract | Contents | Tables | Index | Bibliography |
| Chapter 12 — Stories Of Violent Women And Abused Men In Colorado |
| Next — Violent Colorado women-1998 |
| Back — Stories of abused men |
This site is supported and maintained by the Equal Justice Foundation.