The "no-custody for batterers" legislation comes on the heels of the last legislative session's unsuccessful supervised visitation bill, a.k.a. the Gray/Cohen bill, which after passing the House on a voice vote, was shepherded in the senate as HB 5845 by Senator Cheryl Jacques. This bill was vigorously opposed by fathers' rights activists across the state, who managed to force amendments to the bill that were only cosmetic in nature. The eventual death of the bill in the Third Reading committee was considered a success.
The Governor's proposed bill is more repressive and restrictive than Gray/Cohen. It calls for a rebuttable presumption of no custody if there is "evidence" of domestic abuse. According to present law and court protocols, the standard of evidence for domestic abuse is preponderance of evidence, since domestic abuse is a civil infraction (though violation of an abuse protection order is criminal); however, at abuse protection hearings, hearsay evidence is not only allowed, but is in fact what is supplied by "victims" in the majority of cases. When requested by women, abuse protection orders are essentially rubber-stamped by the commonwealth's jellyfish judges.
By introducing legislation that is even more anti-fatherhood than Gray/Cohen, the Governor apparently recognizes that beating up on divorced and divorcing fathers is a win-win proposition. He correctly perceives divorced fathers as the modern-day nigger class, and is actively courting their disapproval so as to win points with a public that accepts the demonization of divorced fathers. Consistent with this strategy is his proposed legislation to make second violations of abuse protection orders a felony punishable with five-year sentences and $50,000 fine. Unquestionably, Governor Weld is very comfortable in his role as a handmaiden to the victim-feminist culture.