Chapter 10 - The Assault Case
Julian’s assault trial began seven months after wedding.
I attended as witness.
Not every day.
State’s case:
Security video.
Broken furniture.
My testimony.
Officer testimony.
Julian’s statements.
Chair leg.
Bruising to my forearm.
No audio of initial threat.
But text to Margaret minutes earlier:
She said no to accounts.
Margaret:
Set rules.
Admissible limited motive/context maybe.
Defense:
A marital argument escalated.
Julian kicked table in frustration.
Raised hand but did not intend strike.
Ava, highly trained fighter, attacked him disproportionately.
Chair leg was grabbed defensively.
The video mattered.
Frame by frame.
He stepped toward me.
Right arm drew back.
Hand open.
Motion toward face.
I intercepted.
He hit chair/floor.
He got up.
Grabbed broken chair leg.
Advanced two steps.
I kicked object away and swept/pinned.
Then stopped.
I did not continue after threat stopped.
Self-defense proportional.
Defense expert on martial arts said I could have retreated.
Prosecution:
No legal requirement? Illinois self-defense maybe not strict duty retreat in home. But not focus.
Cross:
“You knew you could easily hurt Julian.”
“No.”
“You had twelve years training.”
“Yes.”
“You invited him to hit you by saying ‘try it.’”
“I challenged his threat. I did not consent to being struck.”
“Did you enjoy humiliating him?”
“No.”
“You smiled?”
“Maybe.”
“Why?”
“Fear does strange things.”
Good.
Then:
“You dragged him over broken porcelain.”
“I controlled him while he kept trying to get up and reach a chair leg. The floor was already broken.”
“Did you intentionally cause cuts?”
“No.”
Medical:
Julian had superficial abrasions, bruised shoulder, no fracture.
My arm bruised.
Property damage.
Then Julian testified.
“I never meant hit.”
“What did ‘discipline’ mean?”
“Structure.”
“What did ‘physically’ mean?”
He denied saying? No audio. My word.
Then chair leg:
“I thought Ava might attack again.”
Video showed he grabbed while she had backed 5 feet holding phone? We can say yes.
Prosecutor asked:
“Why not leave?”
No answer.
Then the most damaging:
911 call captured Julian in background:
“You call cops and this marriage is over.”
Not assault proof, but control.
Then verdict.
Guilty of aggravated assault involving use of improvised weapon? Jury found on chair leg. Guilty criminal damage to property? Table mine. Domestic assault attempt maybe.
Acquitted on one count alleging attempted battery for first swing? Wait video obvious. Could convict both. To nuance: guilty attempted domestic battery, guilty aggravated assault with object, not guilty on felony unlawful restraint because no evidence he physically confined me. Good.
Sentence:
Two years state custody? Since no prior record, no serious injury, could get 18 months + probation. But use chair leg. Let's say 22 months custody with eligibility; he serves 15 months after credits. Yet financial trial later may add.
At sentencing I said:
“I do not need him punished because I could defend myself. The crime is not smaller because his hand failed to land.”
Good.
Julian apologized? Not then.
“I regret argument escalated.”
Not admission.
Judge noted lack accountability.
Sentenced 20 months plus 2 years supervised/probation and batterer intervention, consecutive? He remains out pending financial trial? If remanded to custody. Fine.
Financial case proceeds while in custody.
Then media.
Headline:
FINANCE EXECUTIVE CONVICTED AFTER ATTACKING NEW WIFE WHO FOUGHT BACK.
I hated “fought back” framing.
Coworkers.
Gym.
Strangers.
I declined interview.
Then one viral clip? Security video could become public court exhibit. Not automatically online but media obtains. People cheered me throwing him.
I hated.
Comments:
Queen.
Should've broken arm.
This is not what I wanted.
Self-defense became entertainment.
I asked court to limit release? Public exhibits. Hard.
I stopped reading.
Coach Maria said:
“People like clean story.”
“Mine isn’t.”
May you like
“None are.”
Then the financial case gave them dirtier one.
