Police misidentification of the ‘primary aggressor’ in family violence incidents in Victoria

Misidentification, where the victim-survivor is incorrectly identified as the primary aggressor, remains one of the most harmful and entrenched system failures in Victoria’s family violence response.

family violence lawyers and social workers in urban and rural Victoria, Australia, have observed an alarming frequency in the rate at which women are being misidentified as respondents in police applications for family violence intervention orders (FVIOs). Data analysis of Women’s Legal Service Victoria duty lawyer intake forms from January to May 2018 inclusive at Melbourne Magistrates’ Court found that when police identify a female respondent as the primary aggressor, they are mistaken 58% of the time. 

In addition to quantifying this trend, Women's Legal has sought to illuminate the context in which police are determining who the primary aggressor is on FVIOs. Our findings are confirmed by the considerable body of literature which indicates that so-called “mutual” violence between men and women is most often asymmetrical and seeks distinct ends. Understanding that context has implications for how police decide who needs the protection of a FVIO, and therefore whom they name as the “primary aggressor” during their risk assessment. It is our hope that shedding light on this issue will assist police in bringing greater evidentiary clarity to incidents of family violence.

To this end, we are also seeking to better understand the impacts, particularly on the women involved, of misidentification (or “MisID)”.