How Police, Prosecutors And Self-Defense Laws Failed Domestic Abuse Victim Cherelle Baldwin

This is a story about a woman who suffered domestic abuse from her ex- boyfriend, and how the law in my opinion is failing to recognize and stand up for the rights of woman that endure long patterns of abuse, stalking and harassment, that ultimately end up in the death of the abuser and the abused being charged with murder.

Such is the case of Cherelle Baldwin and Jeffrey Brown. The pattern of abuse by Mr Brown was not unknown to the courts, and after being charged with a breach of peace in 2013, the most she could do was get an order barring him from harassment while visiting their son, a tool he used to consistently to find his way into her life.

Source

But it wasn’t over, at least to Brown. He used access to his son to repeatedly threaten her, taking her phone, credit cards and money. He beat her up in her home, causing Baldwin, who is eight inches shorter than Brown, to call the cops twice. After his last conviction in early May 2013 for breach of the peace, a reduced charge, Baldwin wanted to help him get anger management counseling. But the most she could do was get a court order barring more threats, harassment or assaults against her when visiting the boy

However, none of this persuaded Mr Brown from continuing his abusive actions. Two days before Brown's death, he taunted her with text messages, 36 of them, profusely apologizing, wanting money and sex.

Then on June 18th, the day Brown died, he sent her this message:

(Same source)

On June 18, he started again at 6:36 AM, accusing her of lying. After 12 texts, she wrote, “Leave me alone!!!!” He replied, “N u will see how crazy # will get today.”

And crazy it did. Two hours later police and ems showed up to the scene finding Brown pinned against the front end of the car and a cement wall at the end of the driveway, lifeless, and in his hand a leather belt, her purse, phone and credit cards scattered about.

Here is part of Cherelle Baldwin's affadavit to police describing her encounter that day.

(Same source)

She stated her boyfriend attempted to kill her,” the police’s affidavit said, recounting her remarks to the officers. “He climbed through her window, requested his identification, she told him where it was, he began fighting and choking her. Then he pulled a knife and choked her with his belt. Then she ran outside got in the car to attempt to flee. He managed to get in the car and proceeded to choke her again. Then she got out and fell as she did and the car ran over her leg and that he also got out to chase her[,] and the rest happen[ed] too fast and she wasn’t sure how he ended up in front of the Car.”

Needless to say Cherelle Brown is sitting in prison, she's been there for 21 months. How the victim in this case becomes the perpetrator is baffling. I don't understand how the system offers protection, then when tragedy occurs blames the victim and charges them with murder.

Clearly in my opinion the aggressor and his history with the courts and Cherelle Baldwin has failed her miserably. Punishing her for defending herself against a known convict and abuser turns the victim into a suspect by a legal system which automatically turns the victim into a criminal in most cases such as this.

Something definitely needs fixed.

this is a tough one.
if we lived in a world based on my rules, she would not have spent a night in jail, assuming everything posted here is true. you push a person so much, you get what's coming.

But the world is not the way i want it, we have laws, and she did commit murder.
it sucks, but that is all there is to it.

originally posted by: IShotMyLastMuse
this is a tough one.
if we lived in a world based on my rules, she would not have spent a night in jail, assuming everything posted here is true. you push a person so much, you get what's coming.

But the world is not the way i want it, we have laws, and she did commit murder.
it sucks, but that is all there is to it.

Come on dude, really. The double standard of the law. You can be shot and killed by law enforcement, no questions asked, no charges. But when someone gets killed after an obvious scuffle and self defense, there guilty, charged with murder.

The laws are protecting the corrupt, not all, but some. If we treated law enforcement, the rich and politicians with the same scrutiny, I'd bet things would be different.

a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse

its not murder when you are defending your own life.

I am a big proponent of woman being trained to shoot a gun for just this type of reason. Men who don't know how to take "no" for an answer make all men look bad, and I am fully behind culling the herd of such animals.

If everything is as it seems here, they should have shaken her hand instead of putting her in shackles IMO. There's no telling how many other women she potentially saved from this guy's abuse. I find the thought that she is being punished for protecting herself, sickening and that's putting it mildly.

The whole situation could have been prevented had she been able to depend on those who promise to protect and serve. This guy's blood is on the hands of every person that allows bureaucratic red tape to trump the life and rights of anyone.

I normally don't condone violence but I am a wife, I have a mother, I have a daughter.... This is beyond the pale and it happens far too often.

a reply to: Daedal

oh don't get me wrong, the legal system as a whole should be rebuilt from the ground up, but i am only looking at this case, ignoring all other situations, like the tamir rice one, (still REALLY salty about that one)
the law has not been equal for all for quite some time now.

in this case the biggest problem is why wasn't that clearly violent man locked up in prison? there seems to be an orgy of evidence that he belongs behind bars, and like i said i personally think she did the right thing.
but it is murder, like it or not, according to the basic definitions.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All I'm saying is its becoming the norm. The legal system is protecting outright illegal acts by law enforcement especially, who are supposed to be the beacon and example of blind justice.

It's becoming so contorted that people are losing faith in a system that's premise is too protect and serve the public, not protect and serve themselves.

Its in everything. From prisons, to the way we treat our poor and mentally afflicted. The entire legal system is becoming a quasi system used to rule instead of serving.

How desperate did this woman have to be to leave the house with her child inside? Of all the things our tax dollars get wasted on trials like these are just the worst. We meed to have this resolved. I don't think having DA 's that want to make a name for themselves helps either. They shouldn't be asking if they can win a case, they need to be asking if they should try the case to begin with.

It's not just women...many men have been battered by their partners I speak from experience.
Thing is it is harder for a man to get help, it is harder for any man to come forward due to the pressures of society and the ridicule they face.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse

its not murder when you are defending your own life.

I am a big proponent of woman being trained to shoot a gun for just this type of reason. Men who don't know how to take "no" for an answer make all men look bad, and I am fully behind culling the herd of such animals.

I agree. In the early 90's I read an op-ed piece in Ms. Magazine (IIRC) that opined if more men were victims of rape, not only would there be no gun control laws, but carrying a pistol would be mandatory. It sticks out in my mind because Ms. is usually left/liberal on issues.

The silly part is, if she shot him dead as he was coming through her window, everything would be fine.

Think about it.

P

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

she pinned him to a freakin wall, with a car.
i can't even imagine the type of abuse that would bring you to that.
and like i said, in no uncertain terms, i am on her side. after all that abuse, he had it coming.
the real issue is with all this evidence why wasn't the guy locked up in jail? i mean what more proof do you need that he needs to be kept as far away from people as possible?
unfortunately a quick search on google will show this:

. Deadly physical force can only be used if you reasonably believe that (1) the assailant is using or imminently going to use deadly physical force, or (2) the attacker is inflicting or going to imminently inflict substantial bodily harm to you or another person.

to read more

he was not found to be armed, she was in a car so in that sense "safe".
it's just a bad situation all around, but it is what it is

originally posted by: IShotMyLastMuse
...and she did commit murder.
it sucks, but that is all there is to it.

I have to strongly disagree, based upon this:

Then she ran outside got in the car to attempt to flee. He managed to get in the car and proceeded to choke her again. Then she got out and fell as she did and the car ran over her leg and that he also got out to chase her[,] and the rest happen[ed] too fast and she wasn’t sure how he ended up in front of the Car.”

He killed himself. He created the dangerous situation and prevented her from safely operating the vehicle. She made no conscious decision, no conscious attempt, to even injure him with the car -- much less kill him.

It's no different than if he had shot at her while she was driving, she lost control of the car, and it ran into him.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

the woman wanted a "bad boy" and she got one.

He could be charming, loving and apologetic—despite a criminal record of selling guns, robbery, resisting arrest, and more by his early 20s.

she knew his history. at some point in their relationship she was part of this seedy lifestyle. if you play the game sooner or later you're going to pay.

then i wonder about this: why did she have his identification?

He climbed through her window, requested his identification, she told him where it was,

there is more to this story that the article explains. it just sounds fishy.
i want to know her history. i want to know her criminal record. there are still too many blanks to fill before i can say she is or is not guilty of murder.

a reply to: Daedal

This is heart-wrenching.

My first thought was if the prisons are run by private corporations who profit off the labor of prisoners.... they just want warm bodies for their slave labor, by hook or by crook.

And who gets hurt the most? The child.

originally posted by: Daedal
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All I'm saying is its becoming the norm. The legal system is protecting outright illegal acts by law enforcement especially, who are supposed to be the beacon and example of blind justice.

It's becoming so contorted that people are losing faith in a system that's premise is too protect and serve the public, not protect and serve themselves.

Its in everything. From prisons, to the way we treat our poor and mentally afflicted. The entire legal system is becoming a quasi system used to rule instead of serving.

Our legal system was never meant to be a proxy for good self defense and common sense. I understand that folks who live in cities may not understand that, as cities seem to be a great place to erode rights and liberty. But the law is not intended to protect you. Its intended to give redress of grievance. Meaning, when you are wronged the system is intended to right that wrong. But it is not intended to enforce thought crimes and other 'what if" scenarios.

Should the law have done something more? Sure. Just think about it: he beat her up, and the response was to issue a court order telling him he couldn't beat her up any more.

Did the system fail her? To a degree, sure. But in the end we are all personlly responsible for our own safety. Because when the cops fail to protect you, you don't get a second chance to do it right.

a reply to: subfab

Fortunately, her taste in men isn't open to criminal proceedings.

The legal history here clearly shows who the victim was. And lord knows it is bad form to blame the victim.....

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

i'm not victim blaming.
before i can say the woman is guilty or not guilty of murder i would need more information than what the story outlines. it isn't bad form to want all possible information before making a decision on whether or not someone is guilty of murder. i want to see all the texts from both people. not just highlights. we don't have the whole story. how can any of us here make any claim to a person's guilt without all the evidence?

i believe everyone regardless of gender is innocent until proven guilty.

a reply to: subfab

Being in a different state, i won't likely be called for jury duty.

But going off the evidence that is available at the moment.....which includes a legal history with a laughable ruling ("Since you beat her up, we are issuing a ruling that says you can't do that anymore").....

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

fair enough. i can see that point.