You raise a very good point. Indeed, it is important to be able to do this.
According to the Scottish experience, it turned out that prosecutors and police ultimately found it easier to prove coercive control than isolated incidents of physical violence. Coercive control will often manifest itself in a slightly more legitimized or trivialized way. So there is evidence, particularly evidence linked to electronic technologies, such as bank statements. What's more, there are witnesses among family or colleagues.
First of all, you have to understand what coercive control is. Once you understand it well, it's no more difficult to prove than other types of violence. Even in the presence of contradictory versions, if we look at the context and the history, we're able to better determine who the main aggressor is, especially in the context of cross-complaints, and we're very sensitive to this concern. By investigating much more broadly, by having this broader vision, we're better able to gather evidence, track down aggressors and sort out who's responsible in the case of cross-complaints.