CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
Multimedia News
A history of healing victims of violence
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: San Mateo County
)
Judy King, right, distributes pamphlets for nonprofit CORA on Friday.
Miller wasn’t simply Rapoza’s friend, but her human resources manager at Hewlett-Packard. Miller realized she didn’t know how to recognize the signs of domestic violence, and wouldn’t have known what to tell Rapoza even if she had.
Today, Miller is on the board of Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse, a private nonprofit that provides comprehensive domestic violence prevention and assistance in San Mateo County. The organization, which celebrated its 30th anniversary Wednesday at the Kohl Mansion in Burlingame, is reaching out for the first time to the business community, training companies on ways to assist employees experiencing domestic violence.
“Sometimes it’s really simple things like a manager offering an employee a cell phone to keep in contact if they feel in danger, offering flexible work hours to attend counseling or having a security plan if a perpetrator comes into the workplace,” Miller said.
The outreach is the latest in what has been a series of innovative programs on the part of the nonprofit, which serves about 6,000 clients per year. Aside from offering a 24-hour toll-free hot line, emergency shelter, counseling, legal services and case management, CORA boasts one of the most progressive partnerships with law enforcement in the U.S.
CORA has a daily working relationship with the Peninsula’s 22 police departments and the county Sheriff’s Office. Judy King, CORA’s Emergency Response Program police liaison, said counselors are always available by phone to domestic violence victims contacted by police.
“That means 2 a.m. Christmas morning, we can talk to them, offer them shelter, offer them referrals or help with a restraining order,” she said.
The decadelong program was one designed by both CORA and police, Redwood City police Chief Louis A. Cobarruviaz said.
“Relationship abuse is one of the most difficult crimes to address in the sense that there seems to be no end to it,” he said. “We needed someone to work with law enforcement to provide special counseling or house them somewhere safe.”
Domestic violence in the county
Domestic violence reports submitted to the District Attorney’s Office by law enforcement:2007: 1,654
2006: 1,737
2005: 1,814
2004: 1,817
2003: 1,681
Number of domestic violence-related criminal cases filed by District Attorney’s Office
2007: 900
2006: 929
2005: 981
2004: 1,076
2003: 1,093
Sources: San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office
Comments from Examiner Readers
9:20 PM MST on Mon., Oct. 6, 2008 re: "Domestic violence protective orders given all day"
Report as inappropriate
12:18 PM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "A history of healing victims of violence"
Report as inappropriate
2:21 PM MST on Sat., Jun. 14, 2008
re: "A history of healing victims of violence"
Report as inappropriate
8:27 PM MST on Sat., Feb. 23, 2008
re: "Woman set ablaze testifies in support of bill targeting domestic violence"
Report as inappropriate
4:07 PM MST on Sat., Feb. 23, 2008
re: "Woman set ablaze testifies in support of bill targeting domestic violence"
Report as inappropriate
6:06 AM MST on Sat., Feb. 23, 2008
re: "Woman set ablaze testifies in support of bill targeting domestic violence"
Report as inappropriate
3:23 PM MST on Fri., Jul. 13, 2007
re: "More people being turned away from domestic violence shelters"
Report as inappropriate
2:30 PM MST on Fri., Jul. 13, 2007
re: "Domestic-violence victims fail to show due to fear, ignorance"
Report as inappropriate
2:25 PM MST on Fri., Jul. 13, 2007
re: "More people being turned away from domestic violence shelters"
Report as inappropriate
7:38 PM MST on Tue., May. 8, 2007
re: "Domestic-violence victims fail to show due to fear, ignorance"
Report as inappropriate
What is the problem said:
A Woman can yell domestic violence and now get a protective order 24 hrs a day. The man's rights is going down the tube and Liberals like Obama is leading the way.
0 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Noneofyo said:
I don't think companies should hire people who have domestic violence issues. Also once management becomes aware of this situation there should be federal laws put in place to be able to terminate them. They are compromising the safety of the other workers. I never feel sorry for domestic violence "victims." They are aware of the person and their behaviors. They are non caring individuals who don't care about the safety of the people around them. What did that little girl do? She didn't care for her own daughter. I feel horrible for the little girl. The woman deserved to die. She knew who he was all along.
1 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Where's the photo?
1 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
These protective orders are basically only as good as the person they are served on. Some people have no regard for the law, and certainly this piece of paper will not stop anyone determined to contact (and in Yvette's case unfortunately, harm) the petitioner. These orders are mostly used to get a "leg-up" in a divorce proceeding, vacate the spouse from the house, etc. and not for its original intention of protecting someone from a person they fear because of abuse. Often people file for these orders because they feel threatened, but the law states a qualification for this order is an assault or fear of "imminent bodily harm". Not all people who file for these orders qualify, but the judges and district court commissioners who grant them feel as though they need to proceed with caution and grant the order simply out of caution. The orders are becoming abused- the petitioners don't even show up in court to continue the order most times b/c it was just for a temp fix for that time.
95 agree | 99 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Wendy Weinbaum said:
As a Jewess in the US, may I remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun? And that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!!
99 agree | 108 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I feel very , very sorry for Yvette. What a babaric attack! The perpetrator should spend the rest of his scumbag life behind bars (although he probably won't). However, I must strongly dissagree about the need for worse protection laws. These so-called "protection orders" are already unconstitutional and out of control. In the state I live in you can put out of the home that you personally and solely own by an affidavit that merely implies that your spouse "feels threatened" by you. They will be coached by the police as to how to screw you out of everything you own. You will be reduced to living out of your car if you don't have anywhere else to go. They will of course, take away your gun collection regardless of it's value. You will be allowed one supervised visit to retreive some of your clothes. That's when you will probably meet your wife's new boyfriend whom you will also be supporting until you get to the divorce hearing. In the meantime you pay for everything! It happenned
79 agree | 81 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Most of these woman are protecting there kids from the courts giving custody part time or visitations. If these men can not treat a woman good how can he be trusted to behave around a child. Burden of proof is on th mother, the courts with no proof will grant him unsupervised visits or part custody. Getting child support is also the battle, help fund these programs. hey wont pay if the woman leave as a toll for harassment, what the state collects is not enough to survive.
153 agree | 119 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
“Sometimes it’s fear. If they’ve filed for a protective order against their abuser and their abuser gets to them and says, ‘If you show up, I’m going to kill you’ or ‘If you show up, I’ll take the kids’ — it makes it very hard.” Or more often than that, the "protective order" is used as a pre-litigation tactic in what is likely to be a messy divorce. The mother gets a no-contact order, then has to power of the state to keep the dad from seeing the children, temporary maintanece is set, and then after the petiton and temp. orders are filed, dad might get to see kids after a few months. This type of order is a feminist litigation device, and usually dropped once the divorce is settled.
219 agree | 209 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Yeah, there isn't 'enough' funding. Please let me pay more for taxes to bail people out of the situations they get themselves into. How nice. You have to love the nanny society we live in today.... 'my crackhead boyfriend who fathered my fifteen kids slapped me around again! Society needs to put me up, that is, until i need another fix at which point i'll get back with him.' Shocking.
139 agree | 145 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
A better question may have been, "What happens in the domestic violence cases that do show?" What percentages of Padley's staffs' cases win? How does the law level the playing field of women who lack the financial ability to fight "financial abuse" along side the more obvious "physical abuse". I was a victim of physical abuse - hardly one of those "ignorant" cases. I held a master's degree and knew that I had a "good case". My court appointed attorney told me so. The day of justice came....I was made to listen to my 911 call. Then, emotions raw, I was told it was a "he said"/"she said" case. He walked away the case tabled. If he physically abused me again, the first case would be re-opened. He was a college graduate, too. He didn't need to attack me again. He successful took me to court over and over , slowly depleating my alimony, child support, and any savings I had. Financial abuse. He always had a better attorney. I had the most to lose, and did.
312 agree | 270 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree