By Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa, (On Twitter) @c_tamirisa

Office of VP Biden ‏@VP

VP on #VAWA: “Congress should pass the bipartisan version approved by the US Senate.” Read the full op-ed here:http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/31/158921/an-issue-beyond-debate-congress.html …

1776 @1_776

In an online Op-Ed, Vice President Joseph R. Biden is urging the reauthorization of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). VAWA must be reauthorized by the United States Congress but differently.

First, the name of the act must be changed to indicate that the reauthorized act is gender neutral at a time when in more than 50% of American households women are the primary bread-winners. It must be called Domestic Abuse And Violence Act (DAVA) because both men and women can be equally abusive, each in their own ways. Women are no longer the minority in the society both in demographic terms and as a share of national income, especially after the enactment of the Lilly Ledbetter law.

It is important to note here that most statutes in the country do not discern between domestic violence and domestic abuse:

Domestic violence has a higher, quasi-criminal bar for establishment of proof including in civil and family law courts once the 24-48 hour period after the alleged incident(s) to prove criminal aggravated assault or manslaughter charges has elapsed. A pattern of behavior need not be proven.

Whereas, domestic abuse includes mental anguish in a relationship and can provide relief to the aggrieved party through responsible court-ordered separation. Domestic abuse, in contrast to domestic violence, must be clearly defined for statutory purposes and incorporated into court procedures.

In some states there are no laws to expunge incorrect judgments in domestic violence cases because the cases are not categorized as criminal cases. Therefore, there is systemic abuse of domestic violence statutes by the police and local courts and often by women.

In a similar but converse of Sarah Rosio’s case, a criminal case ex post but a domestic violence case ex ante, cited by Vice President Biden, I, the husband, was thrice denied a protective order seeking protection from my former spouse by a judge even though my complaints for relief had met the family law statutory provisions of Maryland’s domestic violence laws.

Especially after 9/11, abuse of domestic violence laws is occurring because of federal intelligence and political interference in local communities, by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), for example in Case # 86316-FL Montgomery County Circuit Court, Rockville, Maryland (MD) where domestic violence laws were used at the behest of Benjamin Shalom Bernanke of the Federal Reserve and Barack Hussein Obama of The White House by the United States Secret Service to wrongfully implicate an upright spouse, myself, because of institutional racism when my record neither has a history of domestic violence nor any incident of domestic violence including in Case # 86316-FL.

My former spouse, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), may have been compromised by US intelligence to “handle” me in my own home at the behest of the Federal Reserve and International Monetary Fund (IMF) over a period of nearly a decade. As a result, I was rendered an Internally Displaced US Citizen Person (IDP) under international law because I was involuntarily removed from my property co-owned with the plaintiff in Case # 86316-FL and from my children for the US government to protect its covert asset.

I was completely in the dark of my spouse’s involvement in intelligence activities except for circumstantial observation until it resulted in physical violence against me in addition to prolonged mental anguish to “cooperate” (be politically correct despite the legal protection of whistleblower laws, No Fear Act and civil service protections for regular government employees including Federal Reserve employees) to support an IMF economist in her career even though I was and am still supportive, balancing my unintended post-separation and divorce life with my past family’s future needs because my former spouse is the mother of my children.

A judge could not expunge Case # 86316-FL, the court’s mistake, now seeking redressal in federal jurisdiction, because the State of Maryland has no laws on the books to do so. Judges in Montgomery County Circuit Court in Rockville, MD understood in real time while the case was being heard in court, without me, the defendant, being present, that my civil liberties would be violated if they complied with the Federal Reserve and the United States Secret Service which were deliberately using the vehicle of domestic violence, and clearly under coercion of the plaintiff appearing pro se with evidence statutorily irrelevant for the purposes of dispensing judgement.

Federal Reserve is now facing a personal injury claim from me for abusing its authority and cover up of its actions which had chronically meddled in my 18-1/2 year marriage to a female IMF economist, who was a friend in graduate school before she was an economist, with 2 children between she and I.

I could still be dead – as evidenced by a quasi-death threat to me and my former spouse in December 2010 from the Federal Reserve which United States Senator Barbara Mikulski is unable to fully investigate because of abject lack of cooperation from the Federal Reserve. I am facing death by government handling remotely at the behest of the Federal Reserve (and its secret society patrons’ influence in government) or by “accident” even though I left my marriage and my marital home more than 2 years ago because I blew the whistle which later produced the anti-corruption-in-government STOCK Act.

Second, DAVA must be a federal statute delegated to the 50 states and territories superseding all the various state and local statutes against domestic abuse and violence.

Third, judges and courts lack in processes to decide equitably in domestic abuse and violence cases. The alleged aggressor, not the victim, must be removed from the household as a matter of judicial process and then proof must be established by the victim (plaintiff) giving the aggressor (defendant) the right to defend himself or herself in person in court, with both sides present with or without their attorneys, before final judgements can be rendered in domestic (including sexual) violence and abuse cases which carry serious repercussions for both parties if misjudged. Allegation is not proof.

Domestic abuse and violence, when they indeed occur in households, are personal matters between the parties involved, courts and law enforcement, but are neither an instrument of institutional abuse nor community meddling and political football.