First woman convicted of coercive control

[BlueSkyandSunshineToday]

There's a significant amount of media coverage about this story - as their should be - a spotlight should be shone on domestic abuse in all its forms.

But, I don't remember seeing proportionate media coverage about the first man convicted of coercive control? Did I miss it?

(I do understand that not all victims want to give up their right to anonymity.)

The first man to be convicted was for a relatively minor offence in comparison and was only jailed for 12 weeks which is why it didn’t get much coverage. It was mainly controlling the use of her phone.

There was a lot more coverage of one of the other early cases though, Mohammed Anwar from S Yorks who forced his girlfriend to diet and exercise and showed her pictures of other women’s bodies saying they were better.

I think that case is a better comparison as it was unusual and quite extreme as this first woman case rather than the ‘first case’ which actually was very unlike the case you refer to.

The abused man has also come forward.... very bravely. I think that has given it more media traction.

The abuse he suffered was really extreme- it wasn’t just coercive control- his abuser stabbed him and threw boiling water on him. She’d probably have ended up killing him if he hadn’t got away. I think that’s one of the reasons the case is getting so much coverage- it unsual to see a woman committing acts of physical violence like this.

Plus he had quite a serious disability. It was an incredibly sad case.

I can’t really object to the coverage because if it gets the word about coercive control out there to anybody, male or female, it’s got to be a good thing.

He was talking about things like not being allowed to sleep in a bed or to contact his family. I would imagine there are quite a lot of people out there that this type of thing is happening to who don’t know it’s illegal so getting the message out that they are is a good thing.

She tortured him physically and psychologically over a number of years and nearly killed him.

Hardly anyone has been convicted of coercive control. Had she just been convicted of that it probably wouldn't have had the coverage it did but she was also convicted of wounding with intent and GBH with intent.

It's newsworthy. The fact it was a woman and an educated, attractive one makes it even more so. There are still a lot of people that think a) women aren't capable of such offences b) educated, attractive people of either sex are less likely to commit domestic violence/sexual offences.

Hence all the 'high flying University student' offenders who are given the benefit of the doubt in far greater numbers (and get more media coverage) than poorly educated from low socioeconomic status violent or sexual offenders.

As a society, lots of people seem to 'expect' that from the latter groups but not the former.

As the previous poster said This also highlights the cohesive control of people with significant disabilities and mental health issues which is something that very really gets coverage in domestic situations.

I think anything that busts stereotypes is important. Male violence is a very real problem, I’ll never say different but the presumption that mothers are always want the best for their children in particular isn’t fair to a lot of children.

This man deserves to be free from this woman and she needs to be prevented from hurting anyone else.

But, I don't remember seeing proportionate media coverage about the first man convicted of coercive control? Did I miss it?

My recollection is there was a significant amount of cover because it was the first.

As others have pointed out the physical injuries in this case were significant.

Re the first conviction of a man Google shows it was reported in the Daily Mail and the Telegraph and several police forces website. My recollection is it was widely reported at the time.

Women are abused, tortured, raped and murdered week in week out. It's mundane and boring.
Man being abused by attractive young woman - now that's interesting. There are lots of nice photos of her, it makes a good story.

Indeed Molly, women are attacked and the press report it. Are you implying they don't?

Well mostly they don't, do they?

MollyDaydream: Women are abused, tortured, raped and murdered week in week out. It's mundane and boring.
Man being abused by attractive young woman - now that's interesting. There are lots of nice photos of her, it makes a good story.

Yes very true. The reporting balance is frequently 'out of whack', and an exception is 'newsworthy' and somehow 'proof' that 'women are just as violent as men'.

I really don't think so. The dead bodies of women piling up on one side disproves the 'women just as violent as men' thing.

Well mostly they don't, do they?

I don't know which search engine or media you use but "woman attacked" brings up a horrifying number of results reported in the mainstream press.

The causes, conviction, sentencing and care for victims is a major concern, but the facts are reported.

It brings up reports about a teeny tiny proportion of the number of women attacked, raped and killed every week.

No one is saying women are just as violent as men and no one is saying that this is more important than male violence.

But it is newworthy. And it is relevant to people abused by women. And if one more person tells me it’s not I think I’ll actually cry. I want women to protect violent men convicted and I want women to are violent convicted. It’s goes without saying I want men convicted.

In this time of honesty let’s not tell children who were abused by their mothers that they weren’t. Or that it wasn’t that bad.

Heart disease and cancer are big killers but we don’t ignore diabetes and asthma.

Well mostly they don't, do they?

They report mainly on cases which are out of the ordinary or something new. Which is why Emily Doherty’s case where she was forced to exercise and diet and shown pictures of ‘better’ women was widely reported.

This one is unusual partly because it is a woman but also because of his disabilities and the fact police were involved and saw his injuries but he went back.

And violence against women isn’t reported for more than one reason. Firstly, unfortunately it is so common place they would be reporting the same thing over and over again day after day. The media is money making, not philanthropic, so it’s not really in their interests to do that. But they do report extreme or unusual cases.

Secondly, there are often reporting restrictions which make them difficult to report on as there is so much they can’t disclose that frequently the stories would make little sense.

Thirdly, for many victims themselves the last thing they want is for the whole thing to be splashed over the press and the internet so that future employers, boyfriends, colleagues, neighbours and acquaintances can look it up and salivate over the gory details of a horrible and traumatising event in their past. They’re not likely to either encourage or cooperate in most cases. And I think if the press were splashing daily with details of DV there would be a very quick backlash to encouraging privacy.

Not all interest or reporting is positive. A lot of it is prurient and distressing.

It's man bites dog syndrome. It's first, its rare and it's extreme - three news pegs.

News is a business, not a public service. And the clue is in the word "new". Events have to be remarkable to qualify as newsworthy.

There is also the salacious element to many (mostly DM) stories ie multiple images of attractive young people because these also make stories more clickable.

But, I don't remember seeing proportionate media coverage about the first man convicted of coercive control? Did I miss it?

Why should the media coverage be proportionate? That's not how newspapers work, they want to get page clicks and sell copies. Would you expect a car crash to get as much coverage as a plane crash? Would you expect a regular person's death to get as much coverage as a celebrity's death?

This case is particularly newsworthy. For starters, it's rare to see a woman convicted of such horrific abuse against a male partner. She was sentenced to 7.5 years, whereas the first man to be convicted of coercive control was given 18 months. The abuse itself was much more shocking: the victim was beaten, starved, had boiling water thrown over him, was stabbed and lucky to survive. The victim suffered from hydrocephalus so was particularly vulnerable. The perpetrator is a young, educated and attractive woman. The victim gave up his right to anonymity and has given interviews about his experience. What more could a newspaper editor want?

I read the Mail Online and I see a dozen (or more) stories a day about men who have been convicted of assaulting, raping or killing women. So let's not pretend that these stories aren't printed. It's just that some will get more attention than others.

Let's maybe just show some respect to the victim. He's waived his right to anonymity in order to raise awareness and encourage other victims of domestic abuse to speak out. I think this thread is in poor taste.