Andrés Charry, a family law specialist and lawyer, shares his testimony of an 18-year marriage that turned into a nightmare during the last 8 years due to his ex-partner's controlling, aggressive, and abusive behavior towards him and their daughter. The abuse included psychological, verbal, and physical violence, isolation from family and friends, and manipulation of their daughter. Despite evidence including videos, audios, and a psychological evaluation showing post-traumatic stress and anxiety, Andrés reports institutional denial and judicial bias. He fled to Spain for safety and is currently involved in ongoing custody and divorce legal processes.
Country: Colombia
State/Province: None
City/Region: Bogotá
Incident Type: Domestic Violence Homicide
Relationship Status: Married
Relationship Duration: 18 years
Incident Date: None
Relationship Origins:
Relationship Stages:
Contributing Factors:
Red Flags:
Motives:
Relationship Outcomes:
How the relationship or connection began.
18 years
Important relationship phases recorded for this case.
Reported red flags or early concern points.
Contributing factors and possible motives from the available sources.
Recorded relationship or case outcome.
English labels are shown first. Original-language titles are preserved for source verification.
Conducta Delictiva - Colombia · Original language: Spanish
Así sobreviví a un matrimonio con una psicópata: perdí a mi hija y temo por mi vida
Domestic Violence
The relationship exhibited classic domestic violence patterns including control, isolation, verbal and physical abuse, and manipulation of the child. The abuse escalated over time, with the victim normalizing early controlling behaviors before physical violence began. The ex-partner's aggression extended to public incidents and legal manipulation, including alienation of the child and obstruction of justice.
There is ongoing criminal and family court litigation including custody and divorce cases. Evidence includes videos, audios, and a psychological evaluation diagnosing post-traumatic stress and anxiety in the victim. The victim alleges judicial bias and institutional denial. A prosecutor was replaced after complaints. Police intervention occurred during public incidents. Protective orders and arrests are implied but not detailed.
Unclear details about the exact timing of first physical abuse incidents. Judicial decisions appear contradictory, with forensic reports recommending child protection but judges denying removal from mother. The victim alleges gender bias and misandry affecting case outcomes.
The relationship began with dating and marriage after meeting at university. Early controlling behaviors escalated to verbal and physical abuse affecting both Andrés and their daughter. The daughter was subjected to abuse and alienation. Andrés installed security cameras after a robbery which documented abuse. After years of abuse and failed institutional protection, Andrés left the home and fled to Spain for safety. Legal processes for custody and divorce are ongoing with conflicting testimonies and evidence.
High risk due to ongoing abuse, stalking, threats, and manipulation of a minor. The victim fled the country for safety, indicating severe threat. Institutional response has been inadequate, increasing risk.
Early controlling behaviors and isolation are critical warning signs. Normalization of abuse delays intervention. Abuse can escalate from verbal to physical and affect children. Institutional bias and inadequate protection increase victim vulnerability. Public exposure and legal advocacy are important but challenging. Support networks and psychological help are vital.
Early controlling behaviors such as forbidding social outings, monitoring schedules, and isolation from family and friends were key early signals.
Security camera videos, audio recordings, and psychological evaluations were crucial clues connecting the abuse allegations.
Video and audio evidence of abuse, psychological evaluation diagnosing post-traumatic stress and anxiety, and forensic reports recommending child protection were strongest evidence types.
Not reported.
Follow-up reports revealed judicial bias and institutional denial, including delayed psychological evaluations and contradictory court decisions.
Exact timing of first physical abuse, full extent of institutional protective measures, and final legal outcomes remain unclear.