CEDAW/C/61/D/24/2009 patterns of conduct and prejudices outlined in the communication, nor provide evidence indicating steps to modify or eliminate them. 8.8 The authors challenge the argument of the State party that all necessary investigative procedures were thoroughly followed during the preliminary investigation, indicating that the State party failed to apply an objective standard of assessment to the prima facie evidence suggesting the commission of an offence and to act accordingly. Even the acceptance by the husband that he caressed h is daughter all the time, that he sometimes hit his wife and that he had dropped his son, T., on to a bed with his face down and hit him several times did not lead to the opening of an investigation. Rather, the authorities concluded that the husband’s beh aviour was not unlawful, thereby demonstrating the institutional failure and the lack of will on the part of the authorities to investigate and prosecute domestic violence effectively. 8.9 The authors further submit that the State party failed to gather an d represent evidence impartially, instead demonstrating a sceptical and disbelieving attitude towards the accounts provided by X and her witnesses, as distinct from an inherent bias demonstrated towards the explanations of the husband. They point, in particular, to the initial failure to interview all potentially relevant witnesses, the use of leading questions during interviews and the request for X to undergo psychiatric examinations in absence of any evidence as to their relevance. It further appears tha t the authorities sought confidential medical information from X’s doctor, without evidence that she granted permission for its disclosure. 8.10 The authors claim that an examination of the judicial decisions demonstrates a judiciary that compounded the omissions and mistakes made by the prosecuting authorities as well as independently demonstrating bias towards the husband. The decision of the Tbilisi City Court of 29 November 2005 lacks impartial analysis and fails to accurately represent both the specifics and the totality of the evidence gathered. The judge concludes with the following passage: “Most significant is the fact that the [author’s] attorney is unable to counter the evidence gathered by the prosecutors through numerous examinations”. According to the authors, this indicates an apparent view that the onus was on them to disprove evidence put forward in the husband’s favour. 8.11 The authors submit that the physical, sexual, emotional and psychological abuse that they suffered has had an enduring impact on their lives and their physical and emotional well-being. 8.12 With regard to the current legislative and policy developments in the State party, the authors submit that, although there are now laws prohibiting and criminalizing domestic violence, their implementation is problematic in practice. 22 8.13 The authors are seeking monetary compensation for the material and moral damage suffered as a result of the violations of their rights. 23 They are also seeking an official apology from the Government, including an acknowledgment of the facts and an acceptance of responsibility for the violations of their rights under the Convention. 24 The fundamental defects within the investigative proceedings at the __________________ 22 23 24 16/19 The authors refer to an expert report prepared by Babutsa Pataria. The authors refer to general recommendations Nos. 28 and 19. The authors refer to general recommendation No. 28, para. 32; General Assembly resolution 60/147, para. 22; and communication No. 1493/2006 of the Human Rights Committee, Williams Lecraft v. Spain, views adopted on 27 July 2009, para. 9. 15-14358