Deadliest Year for Ohio Families Exposes Failures Inside Domestic Courts

CLEVELAND 13 (WCTU) — Ohio experienced a sharp and deadly increase in domestic violence fatalities over the past year, with 157 deaths across 108 cases recorded between July 1, 2024 and June 30, 2025. That marks a 37 percent increase from the 114 fatalities reported in the previous year. The latest figures were compiled by the Ohio Domestic Violence Network (ODVN) and reflect a troubling rise in both the scale and severity of domestic violence incidents across the state.

Among those killed, 95 were victims and 62 were perpetrators. The total count included 82 male and 75 female decedents. Children were frequently caught in the crossfire. Eleven minors were killed and at least 92 children lost a parent to domestic violence during the reporting period. In addition, 38 percent of the cases involving children included custody disputes, and 36 percent of perpetrators were subject to a current or previous protection order at the time of the homicide.

Firearms were used in 84 percent of the fatal cases, making guns the dominant mechanism of death. The ODVN report identified 36 counties with fatalities, including Franklin County with 33 deaths and Cuyahoga County with 20. One unnamed county reported over 20 fatal domestic violence incidents, and another recorded between 10 and 19.

“We’re just stunned by how many more cases there were, and how much more violent and brutal the cases were,” said Lisa DeGeeter, policy director at the Ohio Domestic Violence Network.

The data raises alarm about systemic gaps in Ohio’s court and justice system procedures, particularly regarding the handling of high-risk domestic violence situations. Judicial guidance exists for handling protection orders and firearms. The Supreme Court of Ohio provides judges with reference materials and bench cards to navigate protective order enforcement and firearms surrender, both of which are key tools in managing and reducing lethal risk.

Under Marsy’s Law, Ohio courts must continue a hearing if a domestic violence victim was not given proper notice or consulted prior to the proceeding. Courts are prohibited from making any substantive rulings under these circumstances. Despite this legal requirement, inconsistencies in victim notification continue to delay or derail critical court proceedings.

A proposed legislative measure known as Aisha’s Law aims to address these issues by mandating the use of lethality assessments statewide and expanding emergency protection-order options. Versions of the law have passed the Ohio House multiple times but have yet to be fully implemented across the state.

Family and custody court systems also feature prominently in the fatality data. The Supreme Court of Ohio’s Rule 48 outlines duties for guardians ad litem (GALs), who are appointed to represent the best interests of children in custody cases. Disputes over GAL conduct are frequently raised in appeals, with parties citing failures in reporting, interviewing, and compliance with local court procedures.

Judicial oversight and accountability are under renewed scrutiny following disciplinary cases involving judges who preside over custody and divorce matters. Geauga County Probate and Juvenile Judge Timothy Grendell is facing an 18-month suspension recommendation for misconduct related to custody case handling, including the controversial jailing of minors. Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Judge Leslie Ann Celebrezze has been recommended for a two-year suspension after state findings of multiple acts of judicial misconduct, including making false statements, steering contracts, and mismanaging case assignments. Both judges oversee dockets where domestic violence-related custody disputes frequently arise.

Court performance is further strained by systemic delays in forensic lab processing. Backlogs in drug chemistry, blood toxicology, DNA analysis, and ballistics testing frequently postpone criminal cases and can lead to plea bargains or dismissals due to delays. These problems are compounded by longstanding deficiencies in Ohio’s criminal background-check system, which previously failed to adequately incorporate court records. A recent settlement between the state and several cities has led to commitments to improve the flow and accuracy of court data into background checks used for firearms purchases and employment screenings.

The state has taken steps to strengthen enforcement and case clearance efforts. The expansion of the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN) and DNA testing for firearms by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation, as well as the establishment of a Crime Gun Intelligence Center in Cleveland, are intended to accelerate the identification of firearms used in crimes and facilitate prosecutions. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives depends on courts’ ability to process cases promptly.

While official dashboards from the Supreme Court of Ohio show many courts meeting time-to-disposition standards, those aggregate figures often conceal bottlenecks in specific case types, especially those involving domestic violence, drugs, or firearms. For instance, Cuyahoga County routinely reports compliance with the 24-month standard for criminal cases, but such statistics may not reflect delays caused by lab reports or witness availability.

The 2025 ODVN report reveals that many domestic violence deaths occurred in cases involving prior protection orders, custody conflicts, or relationship breakdowns, all of which are known high-lethality risk factors. Yet courts and law enforcement often fail to identify or respond swiftly to these red flags. Without a standardized lethality assessment requirement across Ohio, dangerous cases may not receive the urgent attention they require.

The intersection between custody cases and domestic violence fatalities is particularly concerning. With 38 percent of cases involving minor children and custody disputes, courts must ensure that GALs are effective, reports are filed appropriately, and that litigants are treated fairly and transparently. The fact that judges who oversee these critical matters are facing ethics investigations or sanctions only adds to public concern.

Gun access remains a pressing issue. With the vast majority of domestic violence fatalities involving firearms, enforcement of court-ordered firearm surrenders is critical. Yet questions remain about how often courts follow up on compliance, how often firearm prohibitions are communicated to state and federal databases, and whether current judicial training materials are being followed consistently.

Efforts to address these failures will require both policy change and consistent enforcement. Among the pressing questions for future reporting are how courts vary in protective order issuance and service rates, whether police agencies are adopting lethality screening tools, and how frequently judges are continuing cases due to Marsy’s Law notification failures. Additional areas of concern include the backlog of forensic evidence, accuracy of firearm-related court data, and the effectiveness of guardian ad litem oversight.

--------------------

At Cleveland 13 News, we strive to provide accurate, up‑to‑date, and reliable reporting. If you spot an error, omission, or have information that may need updating, please email us at tips@cleveland13news.com. As a community-driven news network, we appreciate the help of our readers in ensuring the integrity of our reporting.