Court far too lenient to violent offender

I was deeply concerned by the Sept. 10 article (“Man gets suspended sentence in gun incident”) describing the lenient penalty a New London Judicial District Court handed down to a violent criminal.

The man, Paul Carrier, is reported to have strangled his former girlfriend to the point that she passed out. Authorities also reported that on the day Mr. Carrier strangled her he was violating a court order forbidding him to contact her, and that he also had access to a loaded pistol that he used to threaten a neighbor. Earlier in the year authorities said Mr. Carrier fired a shotgun inside a home after another incident with his girlfriend.

The judge issued the suspended sentence because Mr. Carrier had successfully completed a substance abuse program, which was reportedly originally ordered at the objection of state prosecutors. The judge said she was willing to “take another chance” on Mr. Carrier by suspending his sentence, but warned him to comply with the court orders or he would end up in jail.

Obviously, given the fact that Mr. Karen Jarmoc is executive director of Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence. If you or someone you know needs help, call (888) 774-2900 to speak with a counselor. Learn more about domestic violence, including risk factors and how you can help a friend, at www.ctcadv.org. Carrier was in clear violation of a court order to stay away from his girlfriend the day he nearly strangled her to death demonstrates how much he cares to comply with court orders.

On two separate occasions this man used a gun to threaten people, firing the weapon during one of the incidents. Here again Mr. Carrier was in violation of yet another state law. Connecticut prohibits any individual subject to a restraining or protective order from having a gun. He was subject to an order of protection during at least one of those incidents.

We know what the risk factors are in domestic violence situations. We know that threatening with a weapon is the number one indicator that a victim of domestic violence is at the greatest risk for a fatality. We know that choking or attempted choking is one of the top five indicators of a growing risk that an abusive relationship could turn fatal.

We also know that an abusive individual is not abusive because he or she is under the influence of drugs or alcohol. While those factors may exacerbate abusive behavior, they are not the cause. Abusive behavior is caused by an individual’s desire to control another person. And attempting to control another person by threatening to use a weapon or by strangling them indicates the most serious level of violent, abusive behavior.

It is incumbent upon us all, including judges, to learn about these risk factors and to take them seriously. Here in Connecticut, in the past 30 days, there has been one fatality and three near fatalities stemming from intimate partner violence. The signs were there. They are always there. Domestic violence does not happen in a vacuum. It’s a pattern of abusive behavior and it can escalate over time.

Let’s just hope that none of Mr. Carrier’s former or future girlfriends become victims of this second chance.