Our justice system failed Tiffany Hill. The Vancouver wife and mother followed the rules and took the precautions provided by the system to protect herself from an abusive husband. She wound up dead.
Hill was shot Nov. 26 by her husband while in a minivan in the parking lot of an elementary school, with her mother next to her and her children in the back seat. The tragic tale should provide the impetus for the Legislature and the courts to better protect victims of domestic violence.
In the wake of abuse and threats from her killer, Hill obtained a no-contact order. She obtained a restraining order, seeking to bar him from their shared residence and from having contact with her or their three children. She reported to authorities his repeated efforts to contact her through text messages, phone calls or in person. She went to the Domestic Violence Prosecution Center to report additional contact.
And still she wound up dead.
Hill’s husband was arrested Sept. 11 for allegedly attacking his wife and repeatedly violating the no-contact order. He was out on bail at the time of the killing.
Hill is not alone. According to a 2017 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly half of all female homicide victims are killed by a current or former romantic partner. And research released this year by Northeastern University found that intimate partner homicides increased each year from 2014 to 2017, after decades of decline.
The factors leading to that increase can and should be addressed. But for now the focus is on the system now in place and how to strengthen it.
Lauren Boyd, a Clark County deputy prosecutor who worked on Hill’s case prior to the murder, recommends that the Legislature review bail rules for potentially dangerous domestic violence cases. For example, she says defendants who attempt to purchase a firearm in spite of a court order barring them from doing so should not be allowed to post bail.
In Hill’s case, her husband unsuccessfully tried to purchase a rifle in Multnomah County, Ore., on Oct. 6. Authorities are still determining how he obtained the gun used in the murder.
Boyd had requested a bail of $2 million; Judge John Fairgrieve of Clark County Superior Court instead raised the amount from $75,000 to $250,000. “It’s very difficult to predict what’s going to happen,” Fairgrieve told The Columbian in an interview following the murder. He added that it is difficult to know someone’s motives when they violate a no-contact order, “if the nature is to inflict violence or continue forward with the relationship.”
Therein lies another systemic drawback in dealing with domestic violence cases. If somebody repeatedly violates a no-contact order, they clearly have little regard for the law or the well-being of the person who sought the order. Attempting to “continue forward with the relationship” is not an option for a perpetrator who has been served with a no-contact order — until the victim withdraws the order. The courts must treat such cases with the seriousness they deserve.
Many domestic violence cases end with the victim choosing not to pursue charges or court-ordered protections; Tiffany Hill had previously done so in other states. But if a no-contact order is obtained, victims must be assured that they will have the full backing of the justice system.
Hill did not have that backing. The result was a murder in an elementary school parking lot and a reminder of the need for systemic changes.
