My wife my abuser

[Userxyd]

I'm watching this documentary about domestic violence - physical and emotional abuse over a period of 20 years. Lovely guy just totally abused by a bullying controlling women.
He's telling the story and so are the investigating police officers, saying how shocked they were at his story, and in one clip a female detective is crying when he's said he would change into a shirt with poppers when he knew he would be abused so that at least she wouldn't rip the shirt.
Some of the comments she's said are pure evil - about his mum who died from cancer when he was young "I'd've died too, being related to you". Spitting on him, hating him, absolutely horrific. He's secretly recorded her so we hear her actual voice with the live venom in what she’s saying. He’s softly spoken and stammers quite often- clearly broken. There are videos that he’s filmed inside the house where she’s hitting him and walking around holding a knife.
I haven’t watched episode 2 (of 2) yet.
My question, which I’m reluctant to ask but it’s screaming in my head, is this is obviously horrific, criminal, abusive behaviour and she is rightly locked up now.
But is this any different to what thousands of women face day in day out at the hands of male partners? I don’t think so - and sadly I think women face worse because male partners are generally physically stronger so can inflict worse violence, worse fears of dying, sexual violence etc etc.
Which means why is this made into a tv documentary- is it because it’s a male victim and a female abuser? Is it because there’s compelling recorded evidence they can include? Is it cos they’re youngish (c. 40 I guess), wealthy, good looking, apparently have it all types?
I feel so sad watching it - for the man and his children who’ve suffered this, but perhaps even more so for the thousands and thousands of anonymous women who suffer this and worse and whose stories are too common to be made into tv series.
I just hope that at some point in the next episode there is some acknowledgment from someone that this specific story is horrific, and obviously yes DV does happen to men too, but it’s particularly awful because we all know only too well that this degree of abuse is so common for women at the hands of men.

For these officers it was the worst case of DA they had seen. They don’t investigate murders or CSA, specialist departments deal with these. At the time Humberside Police didn’t have a DA unit so these officers came from a small station department which rarely handled cases of this nature. The interviewing officers are relatively young in service so haven’t necessarily been exposed to offences of this type before.

What makes this investigation stand out, male or female victim, is that we could see what happened inside the address. Most DA cases don’t allow officers to see the level of abuse for themselves. Sitting and watching it and not being able to do anything to intervene, given it was not live, is difficult for anyone to do. Possibly more so for officers whose job it is to try to protect people each day.

I agree that the female officer should not have cried when taking the statement. Hopefully as she matures in service she will develop coping mechanisms to avoid this in future.

I support a programme that provides male victims of DA with the knowledge that they are not alone and will be taken seriously if they seek help. This takes nothing away from female victims. There is enough outrage to go around all DA cases.

@AnotherNameChange1234567 that all makes sense - thankyou for putting it into context. I agree with everything you said and yes the officers were relatively young so sadly have plenty more years to see more of the same and worse.
Agree too hopefully shining a light on this case will help inform all police and public about what all DV/DA cases can be like.
I think the points PPs made about how didn't wider friends etc know is a good one, as the case demonstrates how a relationship can seem normal/great to the outsider and yet be absolutely toxic behind closed doors.

I wondered what the woman was like sober. All of the abuse seemed to occur when she was drunk. I am not excusing her behaviour in any way at all, she was a vicious cow, but she must have had some redeeming features in the beginning.

Thank you for this thread, you’ve articulated what I found so jarring when I watched it. I have huge sympathy for him and the children and I don’t want to minimise what he went through. But I got really quite angry about the police and specialists all sobbing for him.

It was a hard watch all round.

Somebody asked why he didn’t fight back; I think she’d made it very clear to him he was going to be painted as the violent one so I think that was part of it.

The bit where she rattled off her story about the CCTV with the knife, when they played it with no sound first, was chilling. She really knew what she was doing and had her narrative all planned. Evil.

@Negroany

That needs to be changed as well then. Anyone forced to have penetrative sex against their will, whether they are being penetrated or forced to penetrate someone should be classed as rape.

Yes, in fact the only reason it was eventually uncovered was because she claimed that he had been abusive to her to a mutual friend and he showed the friend the footage to show that he wasn't the aggressor, and the friend was so disgusted he sent it to police. And it's clear that her strategy would be to allege she was the victim, if he'd ever put a mark on her.

Also domestic violence isn't just the physical violence. He's had 20 years of coercive control and breaking him down emotionally to the point it was normalised for him to lie down and take it. That's what domestic abuse does.

I disagree.

There is another offense for that - serious sexual assault. I think the definition of rape is exactly right. Serious sexual assault is no less important nor dealt with as lesser in any way. But rape, in my view, is penetration by a penis. That's it.

I'd be interested to see case law on someone "being forced to penetrate" another person with a penis. Pretty sure there isn't any. But, if it happened, it would be serious sexual assault.

I just felt so sorry for him and the children
The incidents where she urinated in the car and in the bed ( only worse in that case) reminded me of the Amber Heard allegations made against her by Johnny Depp.
These people are just beyond help at times. It is so sad and I can imagine men saying ' I'd have done this and that ' when it wasn't in his nature to fight back and she would have used that against him anyway. Such an impossible situation for him.

@Negroany

obviously the legal wording would be better than what I've come up with. A woman having sex with a man against his will is just as bad as a man having sex with a woman against his will. It should be given the same name. Mumsnet is an example of why. Plenty of people on here think that a woman having sex with a man without his consent is somehow less serious than it is the other way around. That is when they can bring themselves to admit that women can sexually assault men.

I agree with this. I watched the documentary and it’s not ever left my mind since.

I think what you're getting at is that the police see it as an outrage when it's a man being abused whereas a man abusing a woman is so familiar it's depressingly run of the mill. Abuse is demeaning to men whereas it's a sad constant for many women.

He was very restrained. I do feel that many men would have done something to her to get her off them. Trouble is she would have been believed that he instigated it all and not her at fault initially ; even though he was filming her , she would lie he was hitting her in another room or something like that. He really was between a rock and a hard place.

The documentary was shocking because this small woman had reduced a man much bigger than her to something so very small. When the police came to the house they noticed this. She (Sheree) attacked Richard so viciously and he took it so that she’d vent all her anger on him and leave their children alone. He mentioned the children numerous times in the documentary and they were at the forefront of his mind.

I think what made the police woman cry was also the fact that Richard was so selfless. When Sheree was arrested, he packed her bag with her hair straighteners that he knew she always needed. Despite all that happened he loved and cared for her. (Perhaps in a way he still does; it must be very complicated). There was a real gentleness and resilience to this man evident in the documentary.

I agree with this.

Thing is, people saying ‘he had the physical strength to overpower her’ are missing the point. When you remove the willingness to use your physical strength from the equation, whether through fear of retribution, counter-allegations (or any other reason) what good does that strength do?

‘Superior physical strength’ can be the red herring that empowers female abusers. It’s my personal and professional opinion that we women are notably better at lying convincingly. Yet we tend to default to belief of a woman who says she’s been abused, we don’t whatabout her with ‘you could be making that up out of spite/ to cover your arse/get the kids.’ Yet those exact scenarios aren’t one in a million. And nor do we say ‘you could always just have knocked the cunt out with a le crueset and claim he swung for you. After all, you’d be more likely to be believed.’ That’s the equivalent of saying ‘yeah but he could still beat her in a fight.’

It’s cold comfort to a man to know that he’s either going to have to fight the knife out of his wife’s hand then struggle against the presumption that women tend to be victims, not perpetrators. That’s why the guy taped her. Proof.

Yes, DV is overwhelmingly male-to-female, and also much more widely reported. Allied with the (long overdue) changes in procedure around domestic violence, we’re now at a point where when a female partner says her man has threatened her with harm or used violence, he’ll find himself removed from the house while the allegation can be investigated. Leaving her with the kids. That’s good, and right, and the system working the only way it can, when he did it, but what about when he didn’t? Even if he’s given the all-clear, there’s the reputational damage, risk to his employment, the fact there was an investigation and him being bailed to a different address potentially being used in family court. ‘No smoke without fire’ is a real threat, particularly to abuse victims who’re psychologically vulnerable.

Female abusers are in a minority but be assured, they’re not rare. Psychological abuse like coercive control is complex and difficult to prove. Female abusers use the threat of false counter-allegations and the leverage of the twin assumptions of vulnerability and strength to control their victims, as male abusers use physicality and financial imbalance.

I'm with you OP.

Seasoned detectives apparently weeping and all the declarations that this is the worse thing they've ever seen. So worse than murder and rape?

And the victim who couldn't leave the situation or call police or social services but had the wherewithal to instal home cameras to film the entire thing and then make a Netflix documentary?

And what's going to happen to his DCs when their classmates laugh at them because their mum and dad are on Netflix? So much for people putting the DCs first.

Sheree is an evil person who deserves her custodial sentence but if a man had committed the same offence, much less fuss would've been made.

@THisbackwithavengeance there's a documentary on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001xbt2/disclosure-surviving-domestic-abuse that follows seven women's stories of domestic abuse. Do you wonder what's going to happen to their DCs when their classmates laugh at them? Or is that a concern that you reserve only for male victims?

Completely agree with you OP. I noticed and commented on exactly the same thing about the reaction of the police.
I'm a family lawyer and I do pro bono calls for a domestic violence charity.

I disagree, it was capturing the abuse on camera which was the effective part and the children witnessing it and having to play along- that is the distressing part.

If this had been a male on female abuse I still this the documentary would have been made.

The difference with female on male abuse is that there is not the physical advantage- so it clearly illustrates the psychological coercive and controlive element.

The more you can relate to the victim the more upsetting it is - so the fact the man was a professional and lived in a nice house with children may have made him more relatable and therefore built more empathy.

@desperatedaysareover @Prescottdanni123 I get what you are saying, I realise why he didn't fight back. The thing is, if it comes to life or death, he could have overpowered her whereas if the violence was the other way round, the woman would be dead, as is what happens routinely.

Often with domestic violence the suspect exploits or creates vulnerabilities like mental health and substance misuse in their victim which then makes the victim harder to relate to as they explain their control and correction as for the victims own good. This undermines the victim wrongly

I think with the argument of he could have faught back you need to see it in the same context as he also could have left as so could a female victim. To fight back would result in his persecution and then been demonised and left his kids with a monster.

This documentary may focus on a male victim but it will shine a light on all DV/DA. It will force people to acknowledge what goes on behind closed doors and take it seriously.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to make this into some sort of male vs female competition.

This wasn't a "normal" level of domestic abuse, it was exceptionally severe and had gone on for an extremely long time, and 3 children had been repeatedly exposed to it. The police officers weren't especially upset because he was a man, they were especially upset because it was especially awful case and the worst they'd seen.

There was also the fact that, due to the fact she'd believed she could rely on stereotypes around DV to make him appear to be the perpetrator and repeated threats to do so, he felt it was necessary to get film footage of everything that happened. It's not usual for police (or anyone) to have to watch and hear that as it happened. It's not surprising they were affected by it.