CHOKED. DISMISSED. DEAD.
Wilson County Called It “Nonviolent.” Who Approved the Reports—and Who Will Answer for Them?
Three domestic violence investigations. Three nonviolent classifications. Three no-arrest decisions. And the same records officer approving all three reports. This is no longer just a question about police training. It is a question about leadership, oversight, and accountability.
An Investigative Commentary by Holly T. Ashley, MS
Executive Director, Cross Strength Ministries
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Advocate
November 9, 2026
There is a particular kind of hypocrisy that flourishes in the Bible Belt.
It wears a suit on Sunday, shakes hands in the church foyer, quotes Scripture when convenient, and talks about faith, family, and Christian values.
Then Monday comes.
A woman calls 911. She reports her husband hit her. She tells a sheriff’s deputy he choked her. She describes being restrained, lifted by her neck, and thrown to the floor.
The official police report classifies the incident as “Family Offense, Nonviolent.”
Someone approves that report.
And eight months later, that woman is dead.
Welcome to Wilson County, Tennessee.
On November 5, 2025, 34-year-old Jessica Arita was killed in her Lebanon home. Her children called 911 during an attack involving their father and a sword.
One child repeatedly screamed, “You killed her!”
Rafael Arita-Alberto was subsequently indicted for first-degree murder.
But this tragedy did not begin on November 5.
It began months earlier, when Jessica was still alive, still reporting violence, and still seeking help.
And now, thanks to records released by the Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, we can examine what happened when she did.
THREE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CALLS. THREE NONVIOLENT CLASSIFICATIONS. NO ARRESTS.
On November 12, 2025, WSMV reported that District Attorney General Jason Lawson acknowledged multiple previous domestic violence calls to the Arita residence.
None resulted in Rafael’s arrest.
The Sheriff’s Office subsequently released three incident reports:
March 3, 2025 — Report #2025012598. Jessica reported being hit, and subsequently alleged choking and other physical violence.
April 8, 2025 — Report #2025021785. A frightened child called 911 during a confrontation. Two adults subsequently reported physical assaults.
August 17, 2025 — Report #2025049111. Jessica reported an unauthorized entry and an injured hand, along with concerns involving the children.
All three police reports were classified as “Family Offense, Nonviolent” (90F).
All three listed “DOMESTIC DISPUTE.”
All three ended without an arrest.
And all three were approved.
That last fact deserves attention.
MARCH 3: THE DEPUTY DOCUMENTED CHOKING. THEN SAID SHE COULDN’T IDENTIFY THE AGGRESSOR.
Jessica called 911 shortly after 7 a.m. and reported that her husband had hit her.
She told dispatch that Rafael had taken her electronic devices. She was calling from her brother’s telephone.
Deputy Blair investigated.
In her report, Blair wrote:
“Rafael started to choke her.”
She then documented Jessica’s attempt to escape:
“She grabbed onto his arm trying to get him to release.”
The narrative continues with allegations that Rafael pinned Jessica down while choking her, lifted her by her arm and neck, and threw her onto the floor.
Rafael reportedly acknowledged taking the family’s phones and tablets.
Yet Blair recorded the following conclusion:
“Myself and Deputy Lucia agreed a primary aggressor could not be determined based on the evidence .”
She also wrote:
“I observed no markings of strangulation or markings that would correlate on Jessica.”
No arrest.
And the official classification? Nonviolent.
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-102 expressly recognizes strangulation or attempted strangulation as aggravated assault.
Visible injuries are not required.
T.C.A. § 36-3-619 requires officers determining a primary aggressor to consider the history of abuse, relative injuries, evidence, future risk, self-defense, and witnesses.
Jessica reportedly grabbed Rafael’s arm to escape what she described as choking.
The report does not document Rafael accusing Jessica of assaulting him.
Yet the deputies could not determine a primary aggressor.
And that conclusion was approved.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), March 4, 2025, at 8:12 a.m.
That name and approval appear on the released report itself.
APRIL 8: A CHILD CALLED 911. TWO ADULTS REPORTED ASSAULTS.
One of Jessica’s children called 911 in distress.
Deputy Bates responded.
He documented Jessica’s allegation:
“She also advised Rafael hit her and knocked her glasses off.”
He then documented Ernesto Piñuelas’s account:
“I then spoke with Ernesto who advised when Rafael showed up he began being aggressive and got in the car and hit him in the chin.”
Bates also recorded that Ernesto did not want to pursue charges, that the parties gave conflicting accounts, and that he watched camera footage on Rafael’s phone without witnessing a physical altercation.
His final explanation was:
“Due to lack evidence of assault and inconsistent accounts no arrest was made.”
No arrest.
Another nonviolent classification.
Another report approved.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), April 9, 2025, at 10:04 a.m.
AUGUST 17: THE 911 DISPATCHER RECORDED AN INJURY. THE DEPUTY’S REPORT RECORDED NO ASSAULT.
On August 17, Jessica again called 911.
She reported that Rafael had entered the residence without permission.
At 9:40 p.m., the dispatcher entered:
“adv male pushed the door and hurt her hand”
She also reported that Rafael was in a room with the children and would not let them out. Later statements clarified that he was not physically holding them and that they were reluctant to leave the room.
Deputy Bates responded.
His report acknowledges that dispatch advised him Rafael had pushed into the house and gone into the children’s bedrooms.
Yet Bates’s narrative attributes this statement to Jessica:
“No assault occurred and he did not hardly speak to her.”
The written report does not reconcile that statement with the hand injury previously recorded by dispatch.
Instead, Bates explained the no-arrest decision by referring to the parties’ residential arrangement:
“Due to Jessica being in the residence during her week but no notification being given to Rafael after she had not been there for three weeks no arrest was made.”
No arrest. (No notification to a court order… nothing to see here, folks. Moving on…)
Another nonviolent classification.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), August 18, 2025, at 11:31 a.m.
Three investigations.
Two reporting deputies.
The same approving records officer.
Three nonviolent classifications.
Three no-arrest decisions.
And on November 5, Jessica was killed.
NOW LET’S TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE ABOVE THE DEPUTIES.
I am tired of hearing every questionable domestic violence response reduced to a training issue.
Of course officers need proper training. I know that I took strangulation trainings, certainly they did… right?
But lets face it. Officers do not operate outside an organization.
They work within policies, procedures, supervisory structures, command expectations, and administrative systems.
Someone establishes those policies.
Someone decides which practices are acceptable.
Someone receives the reports.
Someone approves them.
Someone decides whether questionable conduct requires correction.
And someone is responsible for determining whether the department is actually complying with Tennessee law.
The deputies wrote these reports. But the Sheriff’s Office approved them.
That distinction matters.
The three released reports identify Rhonda Bonner as the approving records officer. They do not establish that she directed the deputies’ decisions, personally conducted a legal review, or possessed authority over their investigations.
They do, however, establish that the reports passed through a documented approval process.
That gives us an administrative trail.
And Tennessee law gives us an even more important one.
THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY INVOLVES SUPERVISORS.
Under T.C.A. § 36-3-619(e), an officer investigating alleged domestic abuse must prepare a complete report and file it with the officer’s supervisor so domestic abuse data can be compiled.
The same subsection requires documentation of the grounds when no arrest is made.
Then subsection (f) goes further.
It requires the officer’s supervisor to forward compiled domestic abuse data monthly to the administrative director of the courts.
Did you catch that?
The legislature did not establish a system where a deputy writes whatever he wants, closes his notebook, and nobody else has a responsibility.
The law explicitly provides for supervisory receipt of domestic abuse reports and the transmission of compiled information.
So, this investigation cannot stop with Deputies Blair and Bates.
It must examine the supervision, approval, classification, reporting, and command practices surrounding their work.
Who reviewed the substance of these allegations?
Who was responsible for the nonviolent offense classifications?
Did a supervisor examine the strangulation allegation before the March report was approved?
Was the August injury allegation reconciled before that report was approved?
Were repeat domestic violence incidents at the same address ever subjected to supervisory risk review?
And when three reports described alleged violence yet used the same nonviolent code, was that treated as normal?
These are leadership and systems questions, not merely training questions.
AND WHAT DOES “COMPLETED” REALLY MEAN?
Every one of the three released reports lists the nonviolent offense entry with the status:
“Completed.”
There is an important distinction here.
The documents also contain separate fields for who cleared the case, how it was cleared, the clearance date, and the incident-based reporting clearance code. Those fields are blank in the released copies.
Therefore, a completed report cannot automatically be described as a crime formally cleared under TBI reporting standards.
But the administrative label still raises an important question.
What does Wilson County leadership measure as successful performance?
Is it the number of reports processed?
The number of calls marked completed?
The number of incidents that never reach a prosecutor?
The number of actual offenses correctly identified, investigated, and supported with evidence?
Or the quality of protection provided to people who report violence?
Those are very different measurements.
And the difference matters.
Because closing out an administrative task is not the same thing as resolving a criminal investigation.
A completed report does not mean a victim is safe.
An approved narrative does not mean the statutory requirements were satisfied.
And a nonviolent classification does not make an allegation of choking disappear.
IS THIS ABOUT JUSTICE—OR ABOUT MAKING THE NUMBERS LOOK GOOD?
This is the part of the discussion that makes political and administrative leadership uncomfortable.
What happens when the easiest way to manage a difficult incident is to classify it as something less serious?
What happens when an arrest generates investigative work, evidence obligations, court appearances, prosecutor coordination, and a case that may take months or years to resolve?
And what happens if an agency’s performance culture rewards the appearance of efficiency more than the thoroughness of its investigations?
Those are legitimate questions in examining law-enforcement leadership.
I am not claiming that the released Arita records prove elected officials ordered deputies to underclassify offenses or that anyone manipulated a crime statistic for electoral advantage.
The records do not establish that.
What they establish is that three reports containing violent allegations were classified as nonviolent and approved within the Sheriff’s Office.
Whether that reflects individual error, inadequate review, policy deficiencies, or a broader organizational practice is precisely what an institutional accountability analysis must determine.
And if case-processing numbers are being used to demonstrate effective law enforcement, then the public deserves to understand exactly what those numbers measure.
Because an agency cannot claim successful enforcement merely by demonstrating that its paperwork moves efficiently.
Justice is not an administrative productivity contest.
Sometimes justice requires a difficult investigation.
Sometimes it requires months of evidence collection. And sometimes that means during campaign season…
Sometimes the right case is the one nobody can conveniently close.
And sometimes doing the job correctly means producing evidence that exposes failures within the department itself.
That is when leadership is tested.
Not when everything is easy.
When the truth is inconvenient.
DON’T HIDE THE RESPONSIBILITY BEHIND THE BADGE ON THE STREET.
The sheriff is responsible for the administration and leadership of the Sheriff’s Office.
No judicial office should escape scrutiny simply because its occupant did not personally write an incident report.
For the Sheriff’s Office, the relevant inquiry includes command policy, supervisory practices, approval procedures, reporting accuracy, training, and corrective action.
For prosecutors, it includes how cases are referred, reviewed, and charged when evidence reaches their office. And yes, I’m about to pop the top on that can of worms too. Stay tuned.
For the courts, it includes the exercise of judicial authority in the cases actually brought before them.
Different offices. Different duties. The same obligation to respect the law.
And if a leader knowingly directs unlawful conduct, knowingly falsifies records, or intentionally violates an official duty with the intent required by Tennessee criminal law, accountability must extend beyond the person at the bottom of the organizational chart.
Tennessee already has statutes addressing official misconduct and governmental-record falsification.
T.C.A. § 39-16-402 addresses specified intentional or knowing abuses of official authority committed with the required intent to benefit someone or harm another.
T.C.A. § 39-16-504 criminalizes knowingly making false entries in governmental records.
A questionable classification is not automatically a felony.
But neither is a badge a defense to conduct that actually satisfies the elements of a crime.
So when can the public expect meaningful scrutiny of possible official misconduct where the evidence warrants it?
And where the statutory elements are established, when can we expect prosecutions?
The law cannot be demanding for ordinary citizens and optional for public servants.
I HAVE BEEN RAISING THESE CONCERNS IN WILSON COUNTY FOR YEARS.
For more than forty years, I have advocated for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
I’ve worked in government, shelters, hospitals, courtrooms, and crisis situations. I’ve participated in legislative advocacy. I’ve seen what happens when violent conduct is minimized, victims are disbelieved, and institutions protect their own comfortable routines.
Jessica Arita was not the first woman whose circumstances have raised these concerns.
I hear similar accounts from women regularly.
Different households. Different circumstances. Familiar complaints.
My husband and I founded Cross Strength Ministries to defend the oppressed, protect the vulnerable, pursue justice, and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
We operate victim advocacy services and a state-certified batterer intervention program.
Yet Cross Strength Ministries has never received a single service referral from a Wilson County district attorney or law-enforcement official.
Not one.
That is our organization’s experience.
And I refuse to pretend there is no reason to examine how available resources are being used—or ignored.
But this goes beyond referrals. It goes beyond arrest statistics. It goes beyond whether one deputy attended a particular training course.
It is about what the people in authority are permitting, correcting, approving, and demanding from those under their command.
I have personally met with Wilson County officials on numerous occasions concerning domestic violence cases, failures to enforce existing laws, and allegations of violent offenses being classified as nonviolent disputes.
And in true Bible Belt fashion, some of these men, with their inflated egos and condescending attitudes, cannot seem to resist mansplaining to me how “things work” around here. Apparently, at 60 years old, I simply don’t understand.
Bless their hearts.
I’ve been doing this work for more than forty years. Some of these men were still in diapers when I began advocating for battered and sexually assaulted women.
I don’t need a lecture on how the system works. I’ve worked within it – from the beginning. I’ve fought to change it, helped write legislation governing it, and spent decades watching what happens to women and children when the people entrusted with enforcing the law fail to do their jobs.
I understand perfectly well how the system is supposed to work.
What I want to know is why Wilson County’s own police reports tell such a different story.
And perhaps that’s the problem. I’m not impressed by titles, political connections, or a man’s ability to quote Scripture while sitting in a position of authority.
Show me the law. Show me the evidence. Show me where you followed it.
Because condescension is not an answer, a badge is not an argument, and public office does not make a man infallible.
And gentlemen, if your explanation of “how things work” cannot withstand examination against the Tennessee Code Annotated, perhaps it’s not my understanding that needs correcting.
THE GOOD-OLD-BOYS CULTURE DOESN’T GET A BIBLICAL EXEMPTION.
This is Wilson County, Tennessee.
We know how small communities operate.
People grow up together, worship together, work together, and support one another’s families and careers.
Friendship isn’t corruption.
But friendship is not a defense against accountability either.
Too often, a man’s reputation in church is treated as proof that his conduct in public office must be above question.
Well, I don’t remember finding that exception anywhere in Scripture.
James 2:1 commands believers to “show no partiality” (ESV).
No partiality for the wealthy.
No partiality for the politically connected.
No partiality for the man who happens to hold a badge, wear a robe, or occupy an elected office.
And certainly no partiality merely because somebody has been sitting in the same church pew for twenty years.
In Romans 13:4, civil authority is described as God’s servant for the good of others.
“For he is God’s servant for your good.” (ESV)
Notice whose good is in view.
Not the officeholder’s reputation.
Not the politician’s comfort.
Not the preservation of a career.
The good of those the authority is entrusted to serve.
And Isaiah 1:17 commands:
“Seek justice, correct oppression” (ESV).
Not manage public perception.
Not protect the institution from embarrassment.
Correct oppression.
If you publicly profess Christ and hold public authority, then you have no biblical justification for treating truth as a political inconvenience.
A title does not make a man righteous.
A church membership does not make him faithful.
And a campaign speech does not demonstrate justice.
His conduct matters.
His obedience matters.
What he permits under his authority matters.
JESSICA’S CHILDREN SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAD TO MAKE THAT CALL.
On November 5, 2025, Jessica’s children called 911 as their mother was being attacked.
They reported the weapon.
They reported the blood.
They screamed for help.
Months before, their mother had called 911 herself.
She reported being hit.
She subsequently told a deputy she had been choked.
The Sheriff’s Office documented that allegation.
The report was classified as nonviolent.
And it was approved.
Then another domestic violence call.
Another nonviolent report.
Another approval.
Then another.
Until there were no more opportunities for Jessica to call.
A homicide prosecution will determine the criminal responsibility of Rafael Arita-Alberto.
But it will not, by itself, answer what happened inside the law-enforcement system during the preceding eight months.
I am not interested in a report that simply concludes officers need more training.
I want the administrative and command records examined.
I want to know how the offense classifications were determined.
I want the supervisor review process examined.
I want to know what standards were applied before the reports were approved.
I want to know whether the required domestic abuse data were compiled and transmitted.
I want to know what departmental leadership considered adequate investigation and documentation.
And I want to know whether practices that may have failed Jessica are continuing to affect other women in Wilson County.
Because if an institution repeatedly produces the same questionable outcomes, accountability cannot stop with the last employee who touched the file.
Leadership is responsible for the standards it establishes, the conduct it tolerates, and the corrections it refuses to make.
And to the men in public office who profess Jesus Christ:
Don’t tell me how much you love the Lord while asking the public to overlook the responsibilities you have been entrusted to discharge.
Don’t tell me about your reputation.
Show me your obedience.
Don’t tell me how efficiently your department processes reports.
Show me whether the law is being enforced.
And don’t expect a woman’s life to be treated as collateral damage in the pursuit of administrative convenience or political success.
Jessica Arita was not a domestic dispute.
She was a woman. A mother. A human being made in the image of God.
She reported being assaulted.
She reported being choked.
Her children witnessed repeated domestic conflict.
And eight months after that first documented emergency call, she was dead.
Wilson County, justice is not measured by how quickly you close a file.
It is measured by whether you faithfully perform the duties entrusted to you.
And those responsibilities extend from the deputy standing in the driveway to the officials responsible for the system in which he serves.
The women of this county deserve the law applied as written.
They deserve accountability.
And they deserve to go home alive.
About the Author
Holly T. Ashley, MS, is Executive Director and co-founder of Cross Strength Ministries. She holds a B.S. in Research Psychology and an M.S. in Forensic Psychology and has more than forty years of experience in domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy, crisis response, victim services, and legislative and court-related work.
Cross Strength Ministries is a Christ-centered, Scripture-saturated nonprofit providing victim advocacy, batterer intervention, parenting education, and discipleship services.
Primary Evidence
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025012598, March 3, 2025, approved March 4, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–4.
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025021785, April 8, 2025, approved April 9, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–4.
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025049111, August 17, 2025, approved August 18, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–3.
Wilson County 911, CAD Call Detail Reports #25D006861, #25D011316, #25D026899, #25D028674, and #25D039078, March–November 2025.
Published and Legal Sources
Brown, Kassidy. “Man indicted for deadly ‘domestic dispute’ in Wilson County.” WSMV, November 12, 2025.
https://www.wsmv.com/2025/11/12/man-indicted-deadly-domestic-dispute-wilson-county/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-3-619, domestic abuse response, reporting, primary-aggressor determinations, and supervisory data duties.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-36/chapter-3/part-6/section-36-3-619/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-102, aggravated assault, including strangulation.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-13/part-1/section-39-13-102/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-402, official misconduct.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-16/part-4/section-39-16-402/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-504, governmental-record tampering.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-16/part-5/section-39-16-504/
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, TIBRS Data Collection Manual, Family Offenses, Non-Violent (90F).
Scripture quotations: English Standard Version (ESV).
Editorial disclosure: This commentary reflects the author’s professional advocacy experience and an examination of released government records. The records establish three nonviolent classifications, three no-arrest decisions, and three documented report approvals; they do not establish that supervisory officials directed unlawful conduct or that political motives caused these decisions. The criminal prosecution arising from Jessica Arita’s death is a separate pending matter.
CHOKED. DISMISSED. DEAD.
Wilson County Called It “Nonviolent.” Who Approved the Reports—and Who Will Answer for Them?
Three domestic violence investigations. Three nonviolent classifications. Three no-arrest decisions. And the same records officer approving all three reports. This is no longer just a question about police training. It is a question about leadership, oversight, and accountability.
An Investigative Commentary by Holly T. Ashley, MS
Executive Director, Cross Strength Ministries
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Advocate
November 9, 2026
There is a particular kind of hypocrisy that flourishes in the Bible Belt.
It wears a suit on Sunday, shakes hands in the church foyer, quotes Scripture when convenient, and talks about faith, family, and Christian values.
Then Monday comes.
A woman calls 911. She reports her husband hit her. She tells a sheriff’s deputy he choked her. She describes being restrained, lifted by her neck, and thrown to the floor.
The official police report classifies the incident as “Family Offense, Nonviolent.”
Someone approves that report.
And eight months later, that woman is dead.
Welcome to Wilson County, Tennessee.
On November 5, 2025, 34-year-old Jessica Arita was killed in her Lebanon home. Her children called 911 during an attack involving their father and a sword.
One child repeatedly screamed, “You killed her!”
Rafael Arita-Alberto was subsequently indicted for first-degree murder.
But this tragedy did not begin on November 5.
It began months earlier, when Jessica was still alive, still reporting violence, and still seeking help.
And now, thanks to records released by the Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, we can examine what happened when she did.
THREE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CALLS. THREE NONVIOLENT CLASSIFICATIONS. NO ARRESTS.
On November 12, 2025, WSMV reported that District Attorney General Jason Lawson acknowledged multiple previous domestic violence calls to the Arita residence.
None resulted in Rafael’s arrest.
The Sheriff’s Office subsequently released three incident reports:
March 3, 2025 — Report #2025012598. Jessica reported being hit, and subsequently alleged choking and other physical violence.
April 8, 2025 — Report #2025021785. A frightened child called 911 during a confrontation. Two adults subsequently reported physical assaults.
August 17, 2025 — Report #2025049111. Jessica reported an unauthorized entry and an injured hand, along with concerns involving the children.
All three police reports were classified as “Family Offense, Nonviolent” (90F).
All three listed “DOMESTIC DISPUTE.”
All three ended without an arrest.
And all three were approved.
That last fact deserves attention.
MARCH 3: THE DEPUTY DOCUMENTED CHOKING. THEN SAID SHE COULDN’T IDENTIFY THE AGGRESSOR.
Jessica called 911 shortly after 7 a.m. and reported that her husband had hit her.
She told dispatch that Rafael had taken her electronic devices. She was calling from her brother’s telephone.
Deputy Blair investigated.
In her report, Blair wrote:
“Rafael started to choke her.”
She then documented Jessica’s attempt to escape:
“She grabbed onto his arm trying to get him to release.”
The narrative continues with allegations that Rafael pinned Jessica down while choking her, lifted her by her arm and neck, and threw her onto the floor.
Rafael reportedly acknowledged taking the family’s phones and tablets.
Yet Blair recorded the following conclusion:
“Myself and Deputy Lucia agreed a primary aggressor could not be determined based on the evidence .”
She also wrote:
“I observed no markings of strangulation or markings that would correlate on Jessica.”
No arrest.
And the official classification? Nonviolent.
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-102 expressly recognizes strangulation or attempted strangulation as aggravated assault.
Visible injuries are not required.
T.C.A. § 36-3-619 requires officers determining a primary aggressor to consider the history of abuse, relative injuries, evidence, future risk, self-defense, and witnesses.
Jessica reportedly grabbed Rafael’s arm to escape what she described as choking.
The report does not document Rafael accusing Jessica of assaulting him.
Yet the deputies could not determine a primary aggressor.
And that conclusion was approved.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), March 4, 2025, at 8:12 a.m.
That name and approval appear on the released report itself.
APRIL 8: A CHILD CALLED 911. TWO ADULTS REPORTED ASSAULTS.
One of Jessica’s children called 911 in distress.
Deputy Bates responded.
He documented Jessica’s allegation:
“She also advised Rafael hit her and knocked her glasses off.”
He then documented Ernesto Piñuelas’s account:
“I then spoke with Ernesto who advised when Rafael showed up he began being aggressive and got in the car and hit him in the chin.”
Bates also recorded that Ernesto did not want to pursue charges, that the parties gave conflicting accounts, and that he watched camera footage on Rafael’s phone without witnessing a physical altercation.
His final explanation was:
“Due to lack evidence of assault and inconsistent accounts no arrest was made.”
No arrest.
Another nonviolent classification.
Another report approved.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), April 9, 2025, at 10:04 a.m.
AUGUST 17: THE 911 DISPATCHER RECORDED AN INJURY. THE DEPUTY’S REPORT RECORDED NO ASSAULT.
On August 17, Jessica again called 911.
She reported that Rafael had entered the residence without permission.
At 9:40 p.m., the dispatcher entered:
“adv male pushed the door and hurt her hand”
She also reported that Rafael was in a room with the children and would not let them out. Later statements clarified that he was not physically holding them and that they were reluctant to leave the room.
Deputy Bates responded.
His report acknowledges that dispatch advised him Rafael had pushed into the house and gone into the children’s bedrooms.
Yet Bates’s narrative attributes this statement to Jessica:
“No assault occurred and he did not hardly speak to her.”
The written report does not reconcile that statement with the hand injury previously recorded by dispatch.
Instead, Bates explained the no-arrest decision by referring to the parties’ residential arrangement:
“Due to Jessica being in the residence during her week but no notification being given to Rafael after she had not been there for three weeks no arrest was made.”
No arrest. (No notification to a court order… nothing to see here, folks. Moving on…)
Another nonviolent classification.
Approved by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), August 18, 2025, at 11:31 a.m.
Three investigations.
Two reporting deputies.
The same approving records officer.
Three nonviolent classifications.
Three no-arrest decisions.
And on November 5, Jessica was killed.
NOW LET’S TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE ABOVE THE DEPUTIES.
I am tired of hearing every questionable domestic violence response reduced to a training issue.
Of course officers need proper training. I know that I took strangulation trainings, certainly they did… right?
But lets face it. Officers do not operate outside an organization.
They work within policies, procedures, supervisory structures, command expectations, and administrative systems.
Someone establishes those policies.
Someone decides which practices are acceptable.
Someone receives the reports.
Someone approves them.
Someone decides whether questionable conduct requires correction.
And someone is responsible for determining whether the department is actually complying with Tennessee law.
The deputies wrote these reports. But the Sheriff’s Office approved them.
That distinction matters.
The three released reports identify Rhonda Bonner as the approving records officer. They do not establish that she directed the deputies’ decisions, personally conducted a legal review, or possessed authority over their investigations.
They do, however, establish that the reports passed through a documented approval process.
That gives us an administrative trail.
And Tennessee law gives us an even more important one.
THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY INVOLVES SUPERVISORS.
Under T.C.A. § 36-3-619(e), an officer investigating alleged domestic abuse must prepare a complete report and file it with the officer’s supervisor so domestic abuse data can be compiled.
The same subsection requires documentation of the grounds when no arrest is made.
Then subsection (f) goes further.
It requires the officer’s supervisor to forward compiled domestic abuse data monthly to the administrative director of the courts.
Did you catch that?
The legislature did not establish a system where a deputy writes whatever he wants, closes his notebook, and nobody else has a responsibility.
The law explicitly provides for supervisory receipt of domestic abuse reports and the transmission of compiled information.
So, this investigation cannot stop with Deputies Blair and Bates.
It must examine the supervision, approval, classification, reporting, and command practices surrounding their work.
Who reviewed the substance of these allegations?
Who was responsible for the nonviolent offense classifications?
Did a supervisor examine the strangulation allegation before the March report was approved?
Was the August injury allegation reconciled before that report was approved?
Were repeat domestic violence incidents at the same address ever subjected to supervisory risk review?
And when three reports described alleged violence yet used the same nonviolent code, was that treated as normal?
These are leadership and systems questions, not merely training questions.
AND WHAT DOES “COMPLETED” REALLY MEAN?
Every one of the three released reports lists the nonviolent offense entry with the status:
“Completed.”
There is an important distinction here.
The documents also contain separate fields for who cleared the case, how it was cleared, the clearance date, and the incident-based reporting clearance code. Those fields are blank in the released copies.
Therefore, a completed report cannot automatically be described as a crime formally cleared under TBI reporting standards.
But the administrative label still raises an important question.
What does Wilson County leadership measure as successful performance?
Is it the number of reports processed?
The number of calls marked completed?
The number of incidents that never reach a prosecutor?
The number of actual offenses correctly identified, investigated, and supported with evidence?
Or the quality of protection provided to people who report violence?
Those are very different measurements.
And the difference matters.
Because closing out an administrative task is not the same thing as resolving a criminal investigation.
A completed report does not mean a victim is safe.
An approved narrative does not mean the statutory requirements were satisfied.
And a nonviolent classification does not make an allegation of choking disappear.
IS THIS ABOUT JUSTICE—OR ABOUT MAKING THE NUMBERS LOOK GOOD?
This is the part of the discussion that makes political and administrative leadership uncomfortable.
What happens when the easiest way to manage a difficult incident is to classify it as something less serious?
What happens when an arrest generates investigative work, evidence obligations, court appearances, prosecutor coordination, and a case that may take months or years to resolve?
And what happens if an agency’s performance culture rewards the appearance of efficiency more than the thoroughness of its investigations?
Those are legitimate questions in examining law-enforcement leadership.
I am not claiming that the released Arita records prove elected officials ordered deputies to underclassify offenses or that anyone manipulated a crime statistic for electoral advantage.
The records do not establish that.
What they establish is that three reports containing violent allegations were classified as nonviolent and approved within the Sheriff’s Office.
Whether that reflects individual error, inadequate review, policy deficiencies, or a broader organizational practice is precisely what an institutional accountability analysis must determine.
And if case-processing numbers are being used to demonstrate effective law enforcement, then the public deserves to understand exactly what those numbers measure.
Because an agency cannot claim successful enforcement merely by demonstrating that its paperwork moves efficiently.
Justice is not an administrative productivity contest.
Sometimes justice requires a difficult investigation.
Sometimes it requires months of evidence collection. And sometimes that means during campaign season…
Sometimes the right case is the one nobody can conveniently close.
And sometimes doing the job correctly means producing evidence that exposes failures within the department itself.
That is when leadership is tested.
Not when everything is easy.
When the truth is inconvenient.
DON’T HIDE THE RESPONSIBILITY BEHIND THE BADGE ON THE STREET.
The sheriff is responsible for the administration and leadership of the Sheriff’s Office.
No judicial office should escape scrutiny simply because its occupant did not personally write an incident report.
For the Sheriff’s Office, the relevant inquiry includes command policy, supervisory practices, approval procedures, reporting accuracy, training, and corrective action.
For prosecutors, it includes how cases are referred, reviewed, and charged when evidence reaches their office. And yes, I’m about to pop the top on that can of worms too. Stay tuned.
For the courts, it includes the exercise of judicial authority in the cases actually brought before them.
Different offices. Different duties. The same obligation to respect the law.
And if a leader knowingly directs unlawful conduct, knowingly falsifies records, or intentionally violates an official duty with the intent required by Tennessee criminal law, accountability must extend beyond the person at the bottom of the organizational chart.
Tennessee already has statutes addressing official misconduct and governmental-record falsification.
T.C.A. § 39-16-402 addresses specified intentional or knowing abuses of official authority committed with the required intent to benefit someone or harm another.
T.C.A. § 39-16-504 criminalizes knowingly making false entries in governmental records.
A questionable classification is not automatically a felony.
But neither is a badge a defense to conduct that actually satisfies the elements of a crime.
So when can the public expect meaningful scrutiny of possible official misconduct where the evidence warrants it?
And where the statutory elements are established, when can we expect prosecutions?
The law cannot be demanding for ordinary citizens and optional for public servants.
I HAVE BEEN RAISING THESE CONCERNS IN WILSON COUNTY FOR YEARS.
For more than forty years, I have advocated for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
I’ve worked in government, shelters, hospitals, courtrooms, and crisis situations. I’ve participated in legislative advocacy. I’ve seen what happens when violent conduct is minimized, victims are disbelieved, and institutions protect their own comfortable routines.
Jessica Arita was not the first woman whose circumstances have raised these concerns.
I hear similar accounts from women regularly.
Different households. Different circumstances. Familiar complaints.
My husband and I founded Cross Strength Ministries to defend the oppressed, protect the vulnerable, pursue justice, and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
We operate victim advocacy services and a state-certified batterer intervention program.
Yet Cross Strength Ministries has never received a single service referral from a Wilson County district attorney or law-enforcement official.
Not one.
That is our organization’s experience.
And I refuse to pretend there is no reason to examine how available resources are being used—or ignored.
But this goes beyond referrals. It goes beyond arrest statistics. It goes beyond whether one deputy attended a particular training course.
It is about what the people in authority are permitting, correcting, approving, and demanding from those under their command.
I have personally met with Wilson County officials on numerous occasions concerning domestic violence cases, failures to enforce existing laws, and allegations of violent offenses being classified as nonviolent disputes.
And in true Bible Belt fashion, some of these men, with their inflated egos and condescending attitudes, cannot seem to resist mansplaining to me how “things work” around here. Apparently, at 60 years old, I simply don’t understand.
Bless their hearts.
I’ve been doing this work for more than forty years. Some of these men were still in diapers when I began advocating for battered and sexually assaulted women.
I don’t need a lecture on how the system works. I’ve worked within it – from the beginning. I’ve fought to change it, helped write legislation governing it, and spent decades watching what happens to women and children when the people entrusted with enforcing the law fail to do their jobs.
I understand perfectly well how the system is supposed to work.
What I want to know is why Wilson County’s own police reports tell such a different story.
And perhaps that’s the problem. I’m not impressed by titles, political connections, or a man’s ability to quote Scripture while sitting in a position of authority.
Show me the law. Show me the evidence. Show me where you followed it.
Because condescension is not an answer, a badge is not an argument, and public office does not make a man infallible.
And gentlemen, if your explanation of “how things work” cannot withstand examination against the Tennessee Code Annotated, perhaps it’s not my understanding that needs correcting.
THE GOOD-OLD-BOYS CULTURE DOESN’T GET A BIBLICAL EXEMPTION.
This is Wilson County, Tennessee.
We know how small communities operate.
People grow up together, worship together, work together, and support one another’s families and careers.
Friendship isn’t corruption.
But friendship is not a defense against accountability either.
Too often, a man’s reputation in church is treated as proof that his conduct in public office must be above question.
Well, I don’t remember finding that exception anywhere in Scripture.
James 2:1 commands believers to “show no partiality” (ESV).
No partiality for the wealthy.
No partiality for the politically connected.
No partiality for the man who happens to hold a badge, wear a robe, or occupy an elected office.
And certainly no partiality merely because somebody has been sitting in the same church pew for twenty years.
In Romans 13:4, civil authority is described as God’s servant for the good of others.
“For he is God’s servant for your good.” (ESV)
Notice whose good is in view.
Not the officeholder’s reputation.
Not the politician’s comfort.
Not the preservation of a career.
The good of those the authority is entrusted to serve.
And Isaiah 1:17 commands:
“Seek justice, correct oppression” (ESV).
Not manage public perception.
Not protect the institution from embarrassment.
Correct oppression.
If you publicly profess Christ and hold public authority, then you have no biblical justification for treating truth as a political inconvenience.
A title does not make a man righteous.
A church membership does not make him faithful.
And a campaign speech does not demonstrate justice.
His conduct matters.
His obedience matters.
What he permits under his authority matters.
JESSICA’S CHILDREN SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAD TO MAKE THAT CALL.
On November 5, 2025, Jessica’s children called 911 as their mother was being attacked.
They reported the weapon.
They reported the blood.
They screamed for help.
Months before, their mother had called 911 herself.
She reported being hit.
She subsequently told a deputy she had been choked.
The Sheriff’s Office documented that allegation.
The report was classified as nonviolent.
And it was approved.
Then another domestic violence call.
Another nonviolent report.
Another approval.
Then another.
Until there were no more opportunities for Jessica to call.
A homicide prosecution will determine the criminal responsibility of Rafael Arita-Alberto.
But it will not, by itself, answer what happened inside the law-enforcement system during the preceding eight months.
I am not interested in a report that simply concludes officers need more training.
I want the administrative and command records examined.
I want to know how the offense classifications were determined.
I want the supervisor review process examined.
I want to know what standards were applied before the reports were approved.
I want to know whether the required domestic abuse data were compiled and transmitted.
I want to know what departmental leadership considered adequate investigation and documentation.
And I want to know whether practices that may have failed Jessica are continuing to affect other women in Wilson County.
Because if an institution repeatedly produces the same questionable outcomes, accountability cannot stop with the last employee who touched the file.
Leadership is responsible for the standards it establishes, the conduct it tolerates, and the corrections it refuses to make.
And to the men in public office who profess Jesus Christ:
Don’t tell me how much you love the Lord while asking the public to overlook the responsibilities you have been entrusted to discharge.
Don’t tell me about your reputation.
Show me your obedience.
Don’t tell me how efficiently your department processes reports.
Show me whether the law is being enforced.
And don’t expect a woman’s life to be treated as collateral damage in the pursuit of administrative convenience or political success.
Jessica Arita was not a domestic dispute.
She was a woman. A mother. A human being made in the image of God.
She reported being assaulted.
She reported being choked.
Her children witnessed repeated domestic conflict.
And eight months after that first documented emergency call, she was dead.
Wilson County, justice is not measured by how quickly you close a file.
It is measured by whether you faithfully perform the duties entrusted to you.
And those responsibilities extend from the deputy standing in the driveway to the officials responsible for the system in which he serves.
The women of this county deserve the law applied as written.
They deserve accountability.
And they deserve to go home alive.
About the Author
Holly T. Ashley, MS, is Executive Director and co-founder of Cross Strength Ministries. She holds a B.S. in Research Psychology and an M.S. in Forensic Psychology and has more than forty years of experience in domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy, crisis response, victim services, and legislative and court-related work.
Cross Strength Ministries is a Christ-centered, Scripture-saturated nonprofit providing victim advocacy, batterer intervention, parenting education, and discipleship services.
Primary Evidence
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025012598, March 3, 2025, approved March 4, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–4.
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025021785, April 8, 2025, approved April 9, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–4.
Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Incident Report #2025049111, August 17, 2025, approved August 18, 2025, by Records Officer Rhonda Bonner (#925), pp. 1–3.
Wilson County 911, CAD Call Detail Reports #25D006861, #25D011316, #25D026899, #25D028674, and #25D039078, March–November 2025.
Published and Legal Sources
Brown, Kassidy. “Man indicted for deadly ‘domestic dispute’ in Wilson County.” WSMV, November 12, 2025.
https://www.wsmv.com/2025/11/12/man-indicted-deadly-domestic-dispute-wilson-county/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-3-619, domestic abuse response, reporting, primary-aggressor determinations, and supervisory data duties.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-36/chapter-3/part-6/section-36-3-619/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-102, aggravated assault, including strangulation.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-13/part-1/section-39-13-102/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-402, official misconduct.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-16/part-4/section-39-16-402/
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-504, governmental-record tampering.
https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-39/chapter-16/part-5/section-39-16-504/
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, TIBRS Data Collection Manual, Family Offenses, Non-Violent (90F).
Scripture quotations: English Standard Version (ESV).
Editorial disclosure: This commentary reflects the author’s professional advocacy experience and an examination of released government records. The records establish three nonviolent classifications, three no-arrest decisions, and three documented report approvals; they do not establish that supervisory officials directed unlawful conduct or that political motives caused these decisions. The criminal prosecution arising from Jessica Arita’s death is a separate pending matter.
Please Share
Related