Greg Banks didn’t tell the press about his early involvement in the Brown case. By keeping silent, Banks let the focus of the public’s concern shift from domestic violence to finger-pointing.

I worked for Banks from early 2001 to mid-2003. The Brown case was given to me to prosecute after another deputy had already filed felony charges. I found Det. Baker’s investigation was voluminous and thorough. It included records of several military investigations that documented years of spousal abuse. After reviewing the whole investigation, including the follow-up materials that Det. Baker provided, and twice interviewing Mrs. Brown, I felt that the evidence warranted additional felony charges. Before drafting the amendments, I detailed the facts to the chief criminal deputy. Before filing them, I talked to Banks. Neither Banks nor his chief criminal deputy disagreed with me.

The key issue in the Brown case was going to be whether we could show a jury that the victim’s behavior was consistent with that of an abused woman. That was a significant task. Even for many prosecutors it is difficult to understand how a woman who has been beaten will return to her boyfriend or husband. It’s harder to show that to a jury. Mrs. Brown’s case was especially difficult because, up until Det. Baker got involved, the defendant was always let off the hook.

Mrs. Brown had no faith that the system could protect her. Like many victims, she compensated. Outwardly, it appeared that she wanted to be with the defendant. She had to live a lie or suffer more abuse. Sadly, that’s the nature of domestic violence – it’s a revolving door of unhappiness for many women and it’s difficult to prosecute. That should be the focus of the public’s concern.

A. O. Denny

Kelso