Why women stay with men who hurt them
They have hurt people physically and emotionally, yet the women who love them have stuck by their side.
She’s there every day, and usually the only person sitting in the public gallery. Immaculately dressed, poised, her lips form a small smile as he enters the dock, flanked by a security guard, and glances back towards her.
As she watches lawyers argue whether or not the man she loves tried to covertly record people in a unisex bathroom, she rarely stirs.
If she feels any disgust at the allegations against former Assistant Chief of Navy Alfred “Fred” Keating, she doesn’t show it.
When Judge Robert Ronayne calls the lunch break, the couple regularly leave Auckland District Court, handin-hand, to stroll in the sunshine at nearby St Patrick’s Square.
He’s accused of hiding a camera in a bathroom at the New Zealand embassy in Washington DC, where he was the senior defence attache to the US. As the forewoman from the jury of 12 strangers announced the guilty verdict last month, she watched silently as Keating slumped and then looked back at her. They left court hand-in-hand.
She’s also not alone in standing by her man, despite serious charges against him.
From the most powerful man in the world to those who hold almost no power, from sports stars to TV stars, from businessmen to professors, politicians and policemen — many have fallen foul of either the promise of fidelity or the law. In some cases both and seriously, with convictions imposed for rape or murder.
And from the outside, it can seem unfathomable.
There is no known research in New Zealand on how many women stay with their partners after they commit a crime, and whether the figure is higher than the men who stay. But the number of men who offend is much higher. Last year, 78 per cent of adults convicted in court were men.
There’s also countless research on women who stay with men who abuse them.
Longtime Hamilton defence lawyer Roger Laybourn “conservatively” puts the number of women who make a complaint of family violence, and then return to the relationship, at one in 10.
“It’s a common pattern that judges, lawyers and police see . . . some are genuine forgiveness, others are battered women’s syndrome where they can’t see a way out.”
reason for staying with her husband, a convicted double murderer, is simple — he didn’t do it. “If he had done it I don’t know whether I would have or bothered,” she tells the Weekend Herald.
“Why would you stay married to somebody who had killed two people?”
But in the eyes of the law, John Barlow is guilty. Father and son financiers Eugene and Gene Thomas were gunned down in their Wellington office in 1994. Barlow — at a third trial called after two hung juries — was found guilty of their execution-style killings the following year and sentenced to life in prison with a minimum non-parole period of 14 years. He was paroled in 2010.
His wife, now 72, stood by her husband through the three trials and his 15-year prison term.
On the phone from the Pukerua Bay home they share, she laughs when she’s asked if she loves her husband as much as when she first met him.
“That’s a strange question,” she says, before delivering an emphatic: “Yes.”
“Otherwise we wouldn’t be enjoying life together.”
Enjoying life together means time with the grandchildren, catch-ups with friends who stood by them and, for John, an antique valuer at the time of the murders, going back to “collecting antiques and things”, she says.
“He likes that sort of thing.” And it means continuing to believe her husband’s claims of innocence. She says she never doubted him, so much so, she never directly asked him if he killed the pair.
“Because I knew he hadn’t. I knew he hadn’t because the circumstances weren’t right . . . he never had any animosity towards them either. Nothing added up as far as I was concerned, and the rest of the family, nobody ever had any doubts.
“I haven’t got blind faith, I have got my eyes wide open. I know actually all the technical details from the case because I’ve read all the transcripts.”
She’s read all the evidence, and believes other evidence that should have been put forward wasn’t. Other evidence was “skewed”.
“For some women there will be denial the offence ever occurred,” says Dr Neville Robertson, a community psychologist and former Waikato University senior lecturer in psychology. For others, whether their partner or husband is guilty of infidelity or criminality, the reasons for staying can range from financial to faith to fear, and many more.
As varied are the reasons people start a relationship, as varied can be as the reasons some women stay in relationships, despite odious crimes or heartbreaking betrayal.
A supportive wife or partner in the court room can be helpful, such as in less emotional cases involving crimes such as dishonesty or fraud, Laybourn says.
“It’s giving the impression that ‘I’m the major victim here’. . . the loyal wife . . . and I’ve forgiven him. I don’t think you can discount they have some influence, and there’s nothing wrong with that. If it helps the jury form a more informed view of the person, I’m all for it.”
While lawyers can’t directly point out spouses and partners sitting loyally in the public gallery, there are techniques they use to make the jury aware.
“It becomes pretty obvious by little waves, little smiles. And you don’t have to be too clever [as a lawyer] to make it known.
“You could be talking to them intently and be ‘startled’ by the jury coming in, or you might give a sympathetic frown as some of the evidence is given.
“There’s all sorts of theatrical tricks.”
And, after all, both sides do it, Laybourn, a 40-year veteran of our courtrooms, says. “What prosecutors do, if they have a big gang trial, is they wheel in some big, serious looking cops. They do it to say ‘we are taking this seriously’. So senior officers, not
“I haven’t got blind faith, I have got my eyes wide open. I know actually all the technical details from the case because I’ve read all the transcripts.” Angela Barlow, wife of convicted murderer John Barlow
witnesses or officers in charge [of the case], will come and sit in the gallery. Everyone plays the game.”
But there might be times lawyers advise their client’s partner not to attend court. Sex offending can be particularly risky.
“You’ve got to make a judgment on the particular case and the evidence of the case. Scenarios where dad is accused of molesting daughter, and mum doesn’t believe daughter. She [mother] sits there in court. I’m not convinced that helps.”
supported her husband, former Christian Heritage Party leader Graham Capill after the then-46-year-old admitted raping a girl under 12, indecent assault and unlawful sexual connection.
The self-anointed moral watchdog who had publicly decried paedophiles, homosexuals and preached about family values, was sentenced to nine years’ jail and spent six years behind bars before he was paroled in 2011.
His wife, who was in court when her husband was sentenced, has said she forgave the father of 10, something that, because of her faith, she had no other choice but to do.
She told the Weekend Herald she did not want to talk further about her decision. “You have no idea how much hurt it causes the victims when they see his name in print. I just don’t want to hurt them any more.”
She later called back to say the pair had been separated for 14 years.
Property records show the couple own two properties in Christchurch, one of which is home to a car rental business which Judy Capill says they own together “at the moment”.
“We haven’t lived together since 2005.”
Meanwhile Tanith Butler was pregnant when her fiance, Brad Callaghan, was charged with the murder of his former partner in 2010, days before Butler and Callaghan’s son was born.
The 33-year-old had bashed Carmen Thomas to death with their 5-year-old son’s baseball bat, before dismembering and disposing of her concrete-encased body in the Waita¯kere Ranges. He later admitted his crimes.
But Butler stood by Callaghan — her support for the killer was acknowledged by Justice Geoffrey Venning when, in March 2012, he sentenced him to life and told him he must spend at least 13 years and eight months behind bars.
Butler was also reported at the time to have visited Callaghan in Mt Eden Prison. She could not be
There are reasons why people are in relationships, and the fact that someone does something criminal, it doesn’t necessarily disinvent those reasons. Community psychologist Dr Neville Robertson
contacted for comment.
Other women reported to have stuck with their partners or husbands after the most repugnant of crimes include New Zealand Fashion Week founder Dame Pieter Stewart, who was a staunch supporter of her husband, Peter Stewart — son of revered plastics and electrical industrialist, the late Sir Robertson Stewart — who spent just over a year in jail after being found guilty of sexually molesting a girl when she was aged under 12, and raping and sodomising her after she turned 13.
Stewart maintained his innocence throughout the trial, but admitted consensual sex with the victim once when she was 17.
The wife of actor Rene Naufahu showed her support when she was baptised alongside him and their children after the Shortland Street star was accused of numerous sex crimes during acting classes. Naufahu later admitted indecently assaulting six women and served a year of home detention.
He confirmed to the Weekend Herald last month he was still with his wife.
South Auckland woman Rebecca Giles supported her former police officer husband, Gavin Giles, in court after he admitted to indecent communication with a person aged under 16. She was at the family home when the Weekend Herald approached her for comment last month.
Giles, then 46, had in 2017 exchanged indecent photos with a 13-year-old Texas girl and is serving an eight-month home detention sentence.
TO QUESTION how anyone can love someone who has hurt others, Robertson is clear that emotional connection isn’t necessarily the main driver of the relationship.
“There are reasons why people are in relationships, and the fact that someone does something criminal, it doesn’t necessarily disinvent those reasons . . . for example, someone might think it’s important [to stay together] for the children.”
Other reasons might be fear of poverty, especially for women, as men traditionally earn more.
People are not one dimensional, Robertson says. “It’s not as if guys who have offended are unidimensional. They’re multifaceted.”
There may be promises of change, and they shouldn’t necessarily be sneered at — plenty of former inmates have turned their lives around after making such vows, he says. “Who’s to say that these [promises] are shallow and meaningless?”
But it’s hard to know if staying in the relationship after one half commits serious crimes is a uniquely female response. Or the exact reason some people choose to stay.
“There are always a number of factors. That’s one of the problems with a lot of research . . . it focuses on one factor. But it’s decontextualised, it ignores a lot of other things.
“I don’t know about you, but there’s not much that’s singular about what drives my behaviour. There are always a myriad of reasons.”
For the slight, silent woman sitting in the public gallery every day for two weeks as her partner unsuccessfully fought an embarrassing and careerending charge last month, the reasons remain unknown.
Neither she nor Keating spoke as they left court after his conviction.
But she’ll have a chance to show her loyalty again. The former Navy man will be back in court later this year, where he could face an 18-month jail sentence.
As Keating faced the cameras and the questions of media outside court after the verdict, she turned her left hand upwards, towards his own. He grasped it and, together, they walked away.