Victims of domestic violence still rarely choose to report the crime to law enforcement. This is due both to fear of the perpetrator, with whom they usually cohabitate, the reaction of family and friends, reluctance to have to disclose embarrassing, from the point of view of the victim of the crime, and the fact that the perpetrator is often the main breadwinner in the family.
Such fears, however, should not influence the decisions of those subjected to domestic violence. Indeed, a sense of impunity can, and usually does, escalate the aggression of the perpetrator.
The support of an attorney in such a case, is extremely important. Your attorney should draw your attention to the evidence that should be gathered even before you file a notice of suspected crime, accompany you to the hearings and participate, without your participation, in the interrogation of the perpetrator and witnesses, and later, represent your interests in court proceedings.
A special type of crime against the family is the crime of abuse. According to the regulations contained in the Criminal Code, whoever physically or mentally abuses a person closest to him or another person in a permanent or transitory relationship of dependence on the perpetrator, or over a minor or a person who is incapacitated due to his mental or physical condition, shall be subject to a penalty of 3 months to 5 years. However, it is necessary to distinguish between a situation of mutual abuse, and a situation in which the victim, the victim, attempts to oppose his abuser. Then, too, the elements of the crime in question will be fulfilled. The defensive measures used by such a person are justified, since they are taken in defense against a direct, unlawful attack on his welfare. Therefore, the defense of the person abused by the perpetrator cannot be considered to take away the characteristics of his action (so, for example, the Supreme Court in its judgment of August 17, 1970, ref. IV KR 146/70).
The object of protection provided by the provision in question is the proper functioning, and therefore the welfare, of the family. In addition to those discussed above, there are two more types of the crime of abuse - abuse with special cruelty and abuse that results in the victim's attempting to take his own life. The former is punishable by imprisonment from 3 months to 5 years, the latter from 2 to 12 years.
The concept of particular cruelty, as indicated in the case law, should be referred to behavior that is exceptionally drastic and abhorrent. Whether a given behavior of the perpetrator can be qualified as „particularly cruel” is determined by his intention, externalized by the type and manner of action - in each case, therefore, it is the type and manner of action of the perpetrator that should be analyzed in detail. Particular cruelty consists primarily in an exceptionally drastic, brutal and merciless manner of inflicting physical and mental suffering on the victim. It is behavior that by its degree of intensity exceeds the concept of abuse, in its basic form. Thus, abuse of a young child, an elderly person, an ailing person, an incapacitated person or a pregnant woman may be considered particularly cruel.
We will deal with the most severe liability for the crime of abuse in a situation where the perpetrator's behavior leads his victim to bargain for his own life, i.e., for example, to attempt suicide. In this case, it will be necessary to demonstrate the existence of a causal link between the various parts of the abuse and the victim's attempt to bargain for his own life. It is worth adding that the perpetrator will also be held more severely liable if he did not have the intention to cause his victim to attempt his own life. It is sufficient to show that the possibility of such consequences was foreseen, or should have been foreseen (so-called inadvertence). In determining these circumstances, the court will therefore examine the environment in which the crime was committed, in particular the intensity and form of the abuse, the perceived suffering of the victim, as well as the victim's mental state at the time the perpetrator committed the crime.
As for the intention of the victim himself, it should be pointed out that, according to the position of the Supreme Court, in order to establish that the premise of „the victim's attempt to take his own life” has occurred, it is not indispensable to establish that the victim wished and intended to take his own life. Indeed, it is sufficient to assume that the victim, being aware that the action, or omission, taken by him may result in death, agrees with this result, approves of it. However, as the Supreme Court emphasizes, this kind of consent by the victim to his death cannot be presumed or conjectured in any way. It must be unequivocally demonstrated that it was one of the elements of the processes taking place in the victim's psyche. In doing so, such an intention can take both an unexpected and sudden form, as well as a premeditated and planned one.
