Domestic violence and the race to the police station
Officers must remember that break-ups are messy, says Douglas McConnell
Relationship breakdowns in Scotland are increasingly intersecting with the criminal justice system. In the emotional shock of separation, it has become common for both partners to feel compelled to report allegations of abuse.
What is becoming increasingly clear is that the timing of those reports can have a profound influence on how the system responds. The first person to reach the police station frequently becomes the “primary complainer,” and that early label shapes everything that follows.
Scotland has made significant progress in recognising the full spectrum of domestic abuse. The introduction of coercive control legislation was a landmark, acknowledging that harm extends far beyond physical violence. The law’s wide reach means that context and chronology matter enormously.
Behaviours once seen as part of the emotional turbulence of separation like angry messages, arguments about belongings, attempts to reconcile can now fall within the scope of criminality. Few breakups are calm or rational, and the timing of a complaint can transform ordinary emotional behaviour into something criminal.
A striking pattern in recent years is the surge in allegations made immediately after a relationship ends. In the first days following separation, emotions are raw, communication is chaotic, and the pressure to “act first” can be intense. Across the profession, clients describe being urged by friends, relatives, and even professionals to “go to the police before they do.” This reflects a widespread belief, often accurate, that the first report carries disproportionate weight. Once a narrative forms around the first complainer, it becomes difficult to shift, even when later evidence complicates the picture.
I have seen this dynamic repeatedly. One client was arrested at work after their former partner made allegations within hours of the breakup. Their reaction, along with disbelief, was: “Look what she did to me!” It captures the sense that the system automatically favours the first complainer, regardless of the wider context.
The sequence of reporting matters. The first complainer is usually treated as the victim. The second complainer is often viewed with suspicion, their account dismissed as retaliatory before any meaningful investigation has taken place. This problem is compounded by a growing practice: police do not always interview both parties. Increasingly, officers decide they already have “enough” information from the first report and proceed on that basis alone. The test they apply is whether there is sufficient evidence to charge and not whether the evidence is balanced, tested, or reliable.
None of this diminishes the reality of domestic abuse or the need for strong protections. But the justice system must distinguish between genuine patterns of abusive behaviour and the chaotic, often irrational conduct that accompanies the end of a relationship. When the law is broad and the timing of a report becomes decisive, there is a clear risk of unfairness.
Police officers need time and training to assess competing accounts without defaulting to chronology. Procurator fiscals need both the time and the full story. Too often, they align with the first complainer, constrained by policy, risk aversion, and the fear of complaint.
Those going through a breakup and those advising them must understand that not every painful separation involves a crime. Human relationships are messy, emotional, and sometimes irrational. The race to the police station should never determine the outcome of a case. Justice demands fairness, context, and the courage to look beyond the first report to the full reality of people’s lives.
Douglas McConnell is a Partner, Duncan & McConnell