geneity within rural regions and everyone knowing each another rural women are not sure whom to trust. Lower population levels result in law enforcement officials having a intimate knowledge of the population. When rural women seek assistance from the criminal justice system the possibility of the abuser being connected with the police officer or judge is high. Preferential treatment is often given in cases where the arresting officer or judge is connected with the abuser (Websdale, 1998). Rural women also perceive this to be true. As noted by one women “As it turns out, my husband’s father worked for the judge, and so the judge’s son and my husband grew up together….and although he’d (the abuser) done all these terrible things to me….they (the courts) put more significance and more loyalty to him over me even though I had been hurt… (p 151).”The nature of handling of EPO’s (Emergency Protective Orders) in rural regions send wrong messages to both victims and perpetrators. Some sheriff departments in rural regions call perpetrators and encourage them to come to the police department to be served the EPO. The reasoning that some sheriff departments conduct the serving of EPO’s in this matter is partly due to the homogeneity of the community and the initimate relationships with the perpetrator. This process sends a clear message that the charges are not serious nor do they require immediate attention. This process is unfair to victims in that their complaints are not taken serious, and places them at an increased rate of violence. Unfortunately, many women are reluctant in testifying against their abuser. Women are reluctant to follow through on charges for various reasons. The need for safety and economic security ranks high on the list especially for rural women. This makes prosecution more difficult. Without the support of the victims statement prosecutors often...
