Domestic violence and the importance of red flag warnings for preventing homicide

Steven Lake murdered his family on
June 12, 2011 in Maine

Red flag warnings exist in most cases of domestic violence homicide. Just as in the case of Steven Lake, seen in his well-circulated arrest photograph, domestic violence has predictable consequences that afford law enforcement a window into the risk of escalating DV. By examining red flags, police have the opportunity to foresee the escalation of intimate partner violence. The timeline of domestic violence and the red flags that are present such as strangulation, any use of a firearm or forced sexual behavior are most common in the most high risk cases. The first given understanding is that DV is a secret, coercive and menacing problem that underlies many relationships, even those of law enforcement officers themselves. Advanced investigative prowess is crystal clear in hindsight. Lenore Walker has said that most family violence goes unreported and is cyclical. Police respond to the cycle after approximately 7 rounds of physical and emotional abuse when victims fear the safety of their children, according to Walker, a psychologist and expert on intimate partner abuse. When a potential victim is sure that her husband or family member will attempt to kill them than one may anticipate a higher level of risk than in a case of DV with physical abuse alone. The spontaneous disclosure of the expectation of death or being fatally beaten is a bold red flag – even higher than cases of pathological jealousy without mention of the fear of one-day being killed by a partner. Similarities exist such that tracking red flags will allow LEO’s on the scene to see for themselves the prevalent danger in many families and arrest men who are most abusive.  Having couples separate until cooler heads prevail does not work in lowering risk – in fact, it raises the level of danger in dysfunctional systems.

The police in Austin, Texas, here in the United States, are dealing with a horrific case of domestic violence homicide just this week in April 2021. A former Traverse County sheriff’s detective killed three members of his family while picking up his son for a monthly supervised visit. Stephen Broderick shot and killed his former wife, step-daughter and the girls boyfriend. He did this all the while he was coming to visit the 9 year old boy. Broderick fled the murder scene was captured 20 hours later. That Broderick was a police officer made this case of special circumstance.

The 16-year old child, who was among the victims, begged for a more restrictive supervision from her step-father who had been released from jail on lower bail and was not required to wear an ankle bracelet after a period of 3 months. The order of protection was brought against former police detective who was now unemployed. In spite of the protection order being in place, even the teen knew that orders of protection were often violated and difficult to monitor. It is reported that when victims believe that they will one day be killed by an intimate partner then the danger is real and should be considered a red flag. Having a child unrelated to the abuser In the household is another significant red flag. The analysis of any case of DV, that is heading toward a terminal event (domestic violence homicide), requires a careful review of symptomatic and behavioral research and observations of cumulative pre-incident indicators exhibited prior to the referenced homicides and suicide. In this case there was none offered.

“In the year that Amy Lake’s protection from abuse order was active against Steven, he violated that order at least five times but spent fewer than two days in jail for those violations, the report found. He also stalked her on Facebook, according to Diane Bowlby of the Bangor Daily News who was at the scene shortly after homicides.

Now nearly 10 years on, the psychological autopsy conducted in 2011, looked at the red flag warnings that are common to DVH everywhere. some I have described above. What brought my attention to the case in Maine was the purported prosecutorial impotence demonstrated by the district attorney Christopher Almy provided to local television. Almy said there was “nothing that could have been done” to protect the victim, Amy Lake and her two children, from her estranged husband Steven Lake. By saying there was nothing that could be done to protect the Lake family, the DA inadvertently undermined not only the police but the many agencies and medical professionals charged with drafting safety plans for victims of intimate partner abuse everywhere. In a similar way, newly elected county DA Jose Garza said he was “confident police did all they could to protect this family and he was incredibly proud of the officers” for the way they handled the Broderick case. More than one citizen comment in the newspaper questioned how anyone can be proud of a situation resulting in the deaths of 3 human beings? Given the outcome in both cases, and countless others, comments such as these strain credulity and fail to inspire.

On June 12, 2011, Mr. Lake snuck into the Amy’s rented home and staged a despicable murder scene ultimately killing the children he claimed to love while Amy was forced to watch. Ending with her shotgun murder and is own death by suicide – ending the Lake family timeline forever.

In an article on contingencies for bail in cases of domestic violence, attorney Nicole R. Bissonnette writes in the the Maine Law Review about the importance of thoughtful conditions of bail, especially among men who are found to have violated these conditions often by texting, stalking and using social media to intimidate and contact potential victims of extended family members. Her published paper adds that failure to relinquish all firearms must be reported to the federal database. Ms. Bissonnette cited our work over 12 times as it pertained to “red flag” warnings and bail reform. Bissonnette raised questions about protection orders and the need for added tools of enforcement for men who violate the protection from abuse orders (PFA) often called restraining orders.

In Maine, men who violate orders of protection are often released from custody with low bail or no bail. Steven Lake was twice released from jail on two thousand dollars that was paid by his father. We proposed increasing bail by a factor of ten on any violation of the stay away order and that a comprehensive review of possible high risk warning signs and psychological history be undertaken prior to release. Using a firearm in the commission of a domestic violence incident is defacto evidence of dangerousness and no bail shall be permitted until such time as all firearms are collected and a viable safety plan is in place for potential victims including police protection. The judiciary must sign on for this and understand the system of bail cannot be linear by assigning bail on the basis of criminal history alone.

The argument made by defense lawyers is invariably, that the lack of a criminal history defies precedent for holding men on large amounts of bail. This is illogical given the numerous red flags that were present in this case and Lake’s disregard for the law. In truth, Mr. Lake had never been arrested for his history of sexual crimes during the marriage, verbal threatening or anything until his final meltdown began. Tension boiled over on June 14, 2010, at the family home at 9 Brighton Road in Wellington when Steven allegedly brandished a gun in front of his family, threatening Amy and the man he accused her of having a relationship with, as reported in the Bangor Daily News. After that event, he was arrested and charged with criminal threatening for which he was heard to say that “he would never serve a day” in jail and that “the price of divorce is 28 cents – about the cost of one bullet.”  A comment that a court appointed psychologist might have wanted to better understand.

Lake slept with a pistol and holster hanging on his bed post. He posed with a rifle in his high school year book.  Steven was a gun guy and owned over 20 firearms. The criminal threatening occurred one year before he killed them all as the trial for criminal threatening approached and as the countdown to his divorce from Amy began ticking louder in his brain. None of his weapons were inventoried by police. Had he been held on high bail for each of the PFA violations and been properly assessed for his proclivity toward violence, he would have been unable to kill them one year down the road in 2011. Yet he had time to scribble over 10 suicide notes blaming everyone but himself for the deaths including the judge and his father-in-law, whom he promised to “see in hell.”  His father told us for the final report that if the judge had only let Steven see his 2 children for the 8th grade celebration, this could have all been avoided. Like his son, the senior Mr. Lake looked to redirect blame away from his son. Aside from visiting the school where Amy taught, the 2 hours we spent with Steven Lake’s parents were perhaps the most unsettling and sad of the nearly 200 hours and over 60 people who agreed to be interviewed. 

Fast forward 10 years. The setting is north central Texas. On Sunday morning April 18, 2021, in northwest Austin, law enforcement officials say Stephen Broderick shot and killed his step-daughter, Alyssa; her mother and his estranged wife, Amanda Broderick, 35; and Alyssa’s boyfriend, Willie Simmons III, 18. The 9 year old biological child was not harmed. 

images
Stephen Broderick booking photo 2021

It is common for former intimate partners troll the social media accounts of family members in an effort to locate estranged spouse and her children who may be in hiding. Both Amy Lake and Amanda Broderick, the Texas mother of 3 expressed an interest in having children remain in contact with extended family, in spite of pending felony charges. Amy was keen to have her children see their grandparents (Steven’s parents) and have supervised visits with Steven.  A continuum of interagency cooperation is needed to effectively measure risk and understand the pre-incident red flags that are common manifestations of abuse and often forecast terminal violence, all of which occurred in the 2 cases in this report. As the totality of these red flags comes into focus it becomes incumbent upon each of us to take action on behalf of those most at risk just as we are mandated to do in cases of child and elder abuse. Amy communicated with her in-laws regularly via social media showing photos and posting life without Steven that he saw while trolling her account. In a similar way, Amanda Broderick wanted her son to maintain contact with his father Stephen.

Meanwhile, Ms. Broderick was said to have been sent over 30 text messages with a variety of intimidating sentiments about the upcoming trial yet she okayed supervised visits with their son, age 9. Any contact like this is a violation of the protective order and should have landed Broderick in jail. And they were sure to open up possible access to the jealous perpetrator to clues about current living arrangements, employment, after school activities, and other potential clues that raised the risk of further domestic violence and ultimately DVH. There were messages of deep felt sorrow and remorse as well, that are common in the cycle of abuse.

While awaiting adjudication of felony charges there must be no contact between children and violent perpetrator whatsoever. In Austin, the victim expressed a wish to allow her estranged husband to have contact with the little boy – his son, in spite of pending felony rape charges brought forth by the 16-year old step daughter who rightfully feared for her life. Amanda Broderick saw this as being in the “best interest of the child”. This remains a weakness in the overall safety plan and should have been denied by the family court.  It was unjustified given the fear expressed by the victims in this case, which ultimately were quite valid.

Firearms are a major cause of DVH and in every state are required to be taken from men with active protection orders in place. This was the default expectation in the two cases described here but in the case of Stephen Lake his arsenal of 22 firearms were not removed from his possession in spite of court orders. Similarly, the Austin killer was left with at least one firearm used to kill his family. Lake left 9 suicide notes many of which were rambling, angry tirades toward his wife and in laws. The Austin killer did not take his own life and was captured raising the specter of possible psychological analysis of his motives making the two cases very different at this level. To what extent Texas authorities will endeavor to understand the events that preceded the murders remains unclear. However, gaining a comprehensive understanding of the red flag warnings in this case is highly recommended and will add to the body of literature on domestic violence.

A court-sanctioned visitation agreement required them to maintain some contact to allow Broderick time with his son. In the application for a protective order, Amanda wrote that Broderick called her some 30 times after she left home to intimidate. She feared he would come after her and the children, she said, “because these allegations have come out and he may lose his career.” He could be dangerous, she warned. So why was the visitation permitted in the order of protection?

Why would a court order that an abused family be required to allow an accused rapist to have visits with a 9 year old child? It cannot be in anyone’s best interest to have forced visitation with a suspected violent and angry abuser. Did no one grasp these red flags? 

One could argue that the killer in Austin, Steven Broderick shared most commonalities with the Maine case ten years previously, including sexual violence, coercion, threats of death, pathological jealousy, violation of the order of protection, trolling social media and refusal to surrender his firearms. He was a cop. Broderick was a SWAT trained police officer who resigned his position after being arrested for sexual assault on his step daughter. He should not have had a firearm pending the outcome of his case. He was released from jail on partial bail because he did not have the funds for the bail that was set by the court. He should not have been permitted to visit with his biological son. The risk of violence as was easily foreseen given past behavior. In the same manner, Stephen Lake would never stand trial, and had a cheap divorce in mind early on. 

“Domestic violence is not random and unpredictable. There are red flags that trigger an emotional undulation that bears energy like the movement of tectonic plates beneath the sea.” according to Michael Sefton (2016).

  1. Threatens to kill spouse if she leaves him – pathological jealousy
  2. Actual use of firearm or other weapon anytime during domestic violence incident
  3.  Access to firearms even if he never used them – veiled threats
  4. Attempt at strangulation ever during fight
  5. Forced sex anytime during relationship
  6. Unemployment of perpetrator
  7. Stalking via social media
  8. Presence of unrelated “step”child in home
  9. Spouse finds new relationship soon after separating
  10. Low bail release from custody – high bail holds are essential in DVH mitigation

If you or someone you know is facing domestic violence, call the National Domestic Violence hotline for help at (800) 799-SAFE (7234)

Sefton, M. (2016) Blog post: DVH in MA: 4 year old child begs his father.  https://msefton.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/dvh-in-ma-4-year-old-child-begs-father-not-to-murder-his-mother/. Taken 4-25-2021

Allanach R. et al., (2011). Psychological Autopsy of June 13, 2011, Dexter, Maine Domestic Violence Homicides and Suicide: Final Report 39 (Nov. 28, 2011), http://pinetreewatchdog.org/files/2011/12/Dexter-DVH-Psychological-Autopsy-Final-Report-112811-111.pdf.

Michael Sefton

Co-occurring Illness: Effecting change at times of crisis

stream_img 

Google images

 

WESTBOROUGH, MA  – April 24, 2017 There is no magic solution for de-escalating someone who is in “crisis” or emotionally distraught.  The loss of control may signal a failure of reality testing that can signal a diminished capacity to appreciate the consequence of their behavior.  This occurs frequently when people who have mental illness have co-occurring drug and alcohol addiction. It is true that the correctional system has more than its share of mentally ill prisoners but for many being in jail is the only way to stay sober.  The full capability to provide mental health services in the correctional system here in Massachusetts has not been realized.  The courts are reluctant to require that someone receive treatment for mental illness and/or substance abuse in lieu of going to jail.

Criminality and mental illness are not mutually exclusive so there will always be a high number of incarcerated persons with chronic underlying psychiatric diagnoses.  The prevalence of mental illness in the general population may range from 5-15 percent. The degree of mental illness in the correctional system may be as high as 40 percent by some accounting but the number is misleading. One needs to consider treating mental illness when it becomes a barrier to functioning such as in schizophrenia or bipolar depression where the symptom profile interferes with reality testing. Only then may a contract for treatment may be constructed to include medication and psychotherapy depending upon the diagnosis.  In cases where mental illness and co-occurring substance abuse exist a determination about primary diagnoses and treatment options must be considered.

“The consequences of dual diagnosis include poor medication compliance, physical comorbidities, poor health, poor self-care, increased risk of suicide or risky behavior, and even possible incarceration” according to Buckley and Brown, 2006

In many cases of emotional crisis those in need can be diffused with recognition of their struggle – such as death of family member or loss of employment.  By showing empathy for their emotional burden police officers and mental health providers can intervene and make a real difference.  But effecting change takes time and a consistent message that personal responsibility begins at home.  Instead of placing blame on a “system” that is filled with holes individuals need resilience and family support to get the help they require. teachinginprisonBefore I am criticized for being insensitive, I point to the 12-step programs in alcohol and drug recovery.  They are free and in many cases provide 24-hour support and mentoring at times of crisis. I strongly believe that if people can remain clean and sober than the need for crisis intervention will decrease.  Ostensibly, this is a perfect first step toward recovery and will bring forth a palpable reduction in emotion and reduce the potential for violence.  When substance abuse is stopped emotional growth is more able to take hold.  Healthy, more effective problem solving may result from prospering emotional maturity allowing for resilience and enhanced coping.

Stress can engulf individuals and families for a variety of reasons and should not be judged. People cope with stress differently and in many cases achieve emotional relief by having someone to talk to.  Some clinicians believe great personal change may be possible when coping skills are most frail.  But in too many instances, drug and alcohol abuse present a confounding variable when working with person’s diagnosed with mental illness. At the same time this raises the risk to law enforcement exponentially. Why?

One response to stress is the increase in substance use and with that increase there is often a worsening of any underlying mental health disorder such as depression and anxiety.  “There could be a common factor that accounts for both, primary psychiatric disorder causing secondary substance abuse, primary substance abuse causing secondary psychiatric disorder, or a bidirectional problem, where each contributes to the other.” (Buckley and Brown, 2006) Unemployment, early childhood trauma, financial burdens, and random emotional baggage result in a range of actions that foreshadow regression and failure of coping mechanisms that put us all at risk.  Some people are able to endure extreme levels of stress with little to no outward sign of distress while others boil over at the first sign of conflict or emotional ripple.

JAIL DIVERSION

There is a growing push toward alternative restitution and jail diversion for those with mental health and substance abuse problems.  In San Antonio, TX, the Bexar County jail had been filled to capacity for many years.  As a jail diversion and mental health program evolved the population dropped by 20-25 percent from 5000 inmates to 3800.  Data suggests that over one quarter of all prisoners may experience mental illness or substance dependence/abuse and are not receiving treatment.  But here in Massachusetts the systems are not available to make this innovation an effective reality in any scale.  Many departments are using jail diversion options such as drug treatment and counseling but here in Massachusetts psychiatric treatment cannot be court mandated. Arrest may not be indicated simply because a person is in crisis but those in crisis may be involved in some type of criminality such as assault, criminal threatening, domestic violence and property crimes. So what options are available? The drop out rate for patients suffering from major mental illness is quite high. They often stop taking prescribed medication and do not attend counseling sessions.

MENTAL ILLNESS, CRIMINALITY AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

bigstock-Mental-illness-in-word-collage-072313As a police officer I found jail diversion a discretionary tool that was used a great deal. Nevertheless there are times when arrest is the proper course of action but jail diversion remains a possible negotiating point for those charged with some crimes.  The correct response to intimate partner violence should include aftermath follow-up and intervention when the immediate crisis has settled from the events that brought police to this dangerous threshold. Arrest is mandated by state statute when one spouse has visible injuries. Whenever possible using a restorative justice model – often limited to incarcerated individuals – may allow those arrested for crimes against persons to reconstruct their encounters with police and gain concrete understanding of events and the impact substance abuse may have had on the actions taken by themselves and law enforcement. Some never attain empathy for victims, family members including action taken by police and wind up behind bars.  Police encounters with persons having co-occurring mental health and substance abuse are frequently violent and often result in charges for assault on a police officer and more. In the aftermath of these encounters offenders may be sent to treatment in lieu of formal charges with the understanding that sobriety and psychotherapy are indicated.  In cases of treatment avoidance police have the option to file charges later on.

Techniques for understanding mental illness may facilitate mutual understanding and establish the needed bridge to facilitate treatment as published in 2015 (Sefton, 2015). Those seeking diversion from incarceration must demonstrate the willingness to change and take responsibility for their actions.  The relationship between law enforcement and community agencies is one that requires a strong foundation and mutual understanding of the framework for reducing recidivism, criminality, and managing mental illness.


Buckley, P. F., & Brown, E. S. (2006). Prevalence and consequences of dual diagnosis. The Journal of clinical psychiatry, 67(7), e01-e01.

Sefton, M. (2015) Emotionally distraught – nearly one-quarter of all officer-involved shootings go fatal. https://msefton.wordpress.com/2015/07/01/emotionally-distraught-nearly-one-quarter-of-all-officer-involved-shootings-that-go-fatal/. Taken March 5, 2017.

Decisions on Bail for Domestic Violence

THERE IS MOVEMENT TOWARD VICTIM SAFETY IN CASES OF DV

lakefoll0916_kc01-250x250
Michael Sefton (right) BDN photo

WESTBOROUGH, MA   Is there any coincidence that Democratic House Speaker Robert DeLeo has joined forces with Attorney General Martha Coakley to bring forth a new bill that will provide for stiffer bail conditions and tougher sanctions for repeat DV offenders?  This bill was brought forth just 2 weeks after the Massachusetts SJC ruled on the case of one abuser against whom a permanent restraining order has been in place for over 10 years.  In that ruling, a man against whom a protective order was written is seeking its dismissal under the broad assumption that he is no longer  a threat to the former girlfriend because he now lives 3000 miles away.  Not so fast said the Massachusetts SJC.

The Commonwealth’s highest court reviewed the historic data in the case record and made its decision based on the documented threat of violence the abuser posed and convictions for DV against more than one partner dating back to the 1990’s.  They voted against dismissing the permanent restraining order writing that victim safety is more important than the purported rights of abusive men.  In the SJC decision the limitations placed on the abuser based on having a “protective order” against him were the collateral consequence of the behavior they exhibited early on.  The abuser believed he was unfairly being prevented from owning a firearm and had limited opportunity to work with children because of the unfair restrictions placed on him by the permanent order of protection.  Furthermore, the SJC also acknowledged that the abuser must show “convincing evidence” that they have made substantive emotional and personality changes that render him no longer a threat to the estranged spouse.

The bill proposed by Speaker Rober DeLeo asks for tougher bail conditions most notably a 6 hour delay before an alleged abuser may be released from custody.  The highly publicized case of Jared Remy who was released from custody hours before be allegedly killed his live-in girlfriend served as a stimulus to the proposed change in the law.  An important consideration not mentioned in the proposed bill is that to do with subjects with known violence in their history and how best to protect victims from revenge abuse once the abuser is released from custody.  Presumably, the new bill affords potential victims the opportunity to put in place a safety plan and affords those making decisions about bail added training about the cycle of abuse, red flag predictors, and greater access to the history of violence of the person in custody.

Unfortunately, the bill does not go far enough in its current raw form to assure that victims of violence receive the needed protection once they decide to break away from dangerous and dysfunctional entanglements.  It is this time when abuse victims are at greatest risk of death due to domestic violence as in the case of Amy Lake, a victim of domestic violence homicide whose case was carefully studied in the Psychological Autopsy of the Dexter, Maine Domestic Violence Homicide (Allanach, 2011) that occurred in June 2011.  Maine has been reviewing bail conditions since this unique study made over 50 recommendations for reducing the incidence of domestic violence homicide in that state.   This report was presented to the Governor’s Domestic Violence Homicide Review Panel in November 2011.  Only recently was a domestic violence suspect held without bail for his history of felony assault and battery on his spouse and a prior domestic partner for over 20 years.  In that case, the abuser was arrested three times in one month for violating an active order of protection during which time he threatened to kill his estranged wife.

Red Flags and Bail Conditions

In Massachusetts, Speaker Robert DeLeo warns that red flags often foreshadow an abuser’s behavior giving clues as to the intentions and the proclivity toward violence.  These are facts that are well described in the literature on DVH.  It is suspected that perpetrators ostensibly inform others about their intentions and all to often, these individuals do nothing to stop the violence.   In a prior paper, I have argued that a domestic violence registry may be useful for keeping track of those who repeatedly abuse or batter their domestic partners.  This would be similar to the sex abuse registry that requires those adjudicated for sexual abuse of children must register whenever they move from place to place.  I have also written extensively on the need for containment of those at highest risk to offend including a pertinent history of physical violence e.g. choking coupled with threats of death, access to firearms, prior violation of an order of protection, the presence of more than one simultaneous protection order (multiple victims), and other forms of coercive control such as destroying personal mementos like favored Christmas ornaments and personal photographs.   A pattern of substance abuse further elevates the risk for domestic violence and DVH.

There are changes taking place in the way in which domestic violence is handled in many states here in the U.S.  Bail conditions are being reviewed with more stringent constraints being placed upon abusers including no bail containment of the most egregious and violent cases.  Further options like GPS monitoring and a domestic abuse registry are being considered in some jurisdictions.  Some experts are calling for added training for judges and greater access to DV history before making decisions about bail conditions.  Arguably, these examples will all add to greater victims security but do very little when emergency protection orders are issued by judges during the night.  Police are frequently asked to present information to an on-call judge in an effort to provide immediate protection following a suspected incident of DV.  This information is critical in conveying what risk exists to the victim or potential victims.  Many police agencies are using dangerous assessment tools to compile and enumerate the red flags that may be the harbinger of terminal rage and the end of one’s timeline somewhere.

Ronald Allanach et al., Psychological Autopsy of June 13, 2011, Dexter, Maine Domestic Violence Homicides and Suicide: Final Report 39 (Nov. 28, 2011), http://pinetreewatchdog.org/files/2011/12/Dexter-DVH-Psychological-Autopsy-Final-Report-112811-111.pdf.

THE LACK OF CRIMINAL HISTORY REVEALS LITTLE ABOUT INTENT TO HARM IN CASES OF DV

Image Sedona, AZ

 Michael Sefton, Ph.D.

New Braintree, MA  Once again domestic violence has resulted in deadly force being used to stop one man from killing his intimate partner and the child they have together.  This cowardly man paid no attention to the court ordered protection order that was in place bringing lethal force to bear upon his family.  His guns were not removed from his control leaving him armed and dangerous.  Only this time, it is he who died in the violent final act before he could finish what he had come to do.  Police were ready for violence and met force with appropriate force resulting in death.  The surviving victims are fortunate for the action of the brave and courageous officers on duty in Calais, Maine on this night or they may have lost their lives in a murder-suicide – now all too common in northern, Maine.

The details of this Calais, ME case of domestic violence are being carefully guarded.  It is known that Daniel Phinney, 26 was out on bail after being arrested and charged with domestic violence and criminal threatening in May 2013.  At that point he must have both physically assaulted his significant other and threatened to kill or maim his family resulting in the charge of criminal threatening.  Police are quick to say that Phinney had no prior criminal history perhaps in an effort to circumvent the obvious outrage evoked by the system of bail in Maine that releases violent abusers over and over again.  Had anyone made an effort to determine the degree of risk posed by Daniel Phinney prior to his release?  Had anyone registered safety concerns based on the defendant’s behavior and history?  Had they undertaken a psychological assessment of Phinney that may have provided important details about his impulse control, substance use, and proclivity toward violence?  These details may become more apparent in the coming days.  Perhaps a second look at the Psychological Autopsy of the Dexter Maine Homicide may be of value in terms of understanding risk and red flag behaviors that warrant containment of domestic terrorists.

The Phinney case is reminiscent of the 2011 Steven Lake homicide in Dexter in too many ways.  Lake had twice been released on bail before murdering his family.  The medical autopsy concluded that “in spite of psychological counseling (the state) failed to appreciate the degree of anger and violence in (Steven Lake)”.  He too had been charged with criminal threatening after holding his family at gunpoint as he drove home the point about how much he loved them but he could not let Amy move on.  Perhaps criminal threatening behavior should trigger a closer look at risk factors when setting conditions of bail.

I was a member of a team that conducted a psychological autopsy on Lake that resulted in over 50 recommendations to the esteemed Maine Attorney General’s Homicide Review panel in November 2012.  At first glance what is clear is brash indifference toward the court protection order and the availability of firearms to the defendant.  It is now important to study the case of Daniel Phinney and learn from the many red flags he waved in the weeks prior to his death.  These events can be stopping and containments points in future cases of domestic violence and domestic violence homicide.  No family should be kept in fear by a spouse whose loathsome behavior derails all human spirit and sense of dignity.