Restraining orders or protection-from-abuse orders from a random stranger are not a big deal. But if you are ordered to stay away from your home, your kids, your documents, your clothing, your medicines, your library, computer, then this is a disaster.
Restraining order to immediately stay away from own house,
all belongings, documents, clothing, children?
How can you be kicked out of your own home, with no prior warning, no chance to take your ID and documents, pick up a change of underwear, not even your credit card so you can buy underwear. But you have the obligation to continue paying the mortgage, or rent, are prohibited to even send a text message to your kids. If this is a shared marital home, it is very bad. If this is the man’s home and the complainant a mere girl friend he allowed to live there, that now kicks him out of his own property and home, the injustice is worse.
This restraining order has the same effect as if a tsunami or tornado had passed over one’s home. Immediate homelessness, living on the street. But it is worse. After a tsunami, one can go back to the remnants of the home and try to find one’s Identification papers, and also has a chance to find a shelter. And all this basically with no due process, with no proof, and for crimes as simple as allegations of annoying a woman, without corroborating proof.
Slightest violation of unjustified protection from abuse/ restraining order:
mandatory felony jail terms
Any innocent unintended violation of a restraining order leads to mandatory felony jail terms as happened to Dr. Emerson. His life was ruined due to unproven (probably false accusations), a protection from abuse/restraining order and the consequential criminalization of his perfectly legal gun collection.
Why can’t she leave if she feels threatened?
Why can’t she leave if she feels threatened? Even if he committed violence, a man’s home should be sacred.
Whoever is the main home owner, the main tenant, the payee of rent should have the right to stay. Are there no constitutional protections? This is worse then anything I have read about the worst dictatorships.
She could leave and have visitations accompanied by another person to guarantee her safety and to in order have witnesses. Best would be to record all visitations on video.
Or split the home in two parts
One with the front entrance, one with the rear entrance. Whatever, find a solution that is feasible.
Other Life-Ruining dangers to law abiding men (or, rarely, women)
Human Stupidity has documented other ways how a law abiding man can be ruined:
- Our legal system’s overcriminalization has led to thousands of man-made dangers in our lives.
- child porn allegations as it happened to Simon-Timmermann, false rape or child abuse accusations. Or
- child abuse or rape accusations
- talking about unpopular truths in politically incorrect ways like race and IQ differences, like Nobel Prize winner James Watson.
Unproven allegations to have "annoyed" a woman is enough for protection from abuse order
RADAR reports that only five states define domestic violence in terms of overt actions that can be objectively proven or refuted in a court of law. The rest of the states have broadened their definition to include fear, emotional distress, and psychological feelings.
The use of the word "harassment" in domestic violence definitions is borrowed from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s definition, which is based on the "effect" of an action rather than the action itself. In Oklahoma, a man can be charged with harassment if he seriously "annoys" a woman.
Laughing At Restraining Orders
Millions of restraining orders, 81% of them false or unnecessary
false allegations of domestic violence have now become widespread. Each year, at
least one million allegations of domestic violence are made in which no physical violence is even
alleged.1 One recent study concluded that 81% of restraining orders were false or unnecessary.2
White Paper – False Accusations | Radar
Recommended reading
The 1999 book by University of Massachusetts Professor Daphne Patai, "Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism," powerfully indicts what she labels the "Sexual Harassment Industry." The feminists have created a judicial world in which accusation equals guilt, and the distinction between severe offenses and trivial annoyances is erased.
Violating due Process
3. Whereas, the U.S. Constitution provides for a range of civil liberties, including the rights to due
process and to equal protection under the law.
4. Whereas, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that “the interest of parents in the care, custody, and
control of their children — is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this
Court,”2
5. Whereas, physical aggression between intimate partners is a problem in our society, and extensive
research shows that women are at least as likely as men to engage in partner aggression.3,4,5
VAWA Reform | Radar
Temporary Restraining order(TRO) against TV Host David Letterman from 2000 miles away could lead to mandatory felony jail terms
Santa Fe, New Mexico family court judge granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) against TV talk show host David Letterman to protect a woman he had never met, never heard of, and lived 2,000 miles away from. Colleen Nestler claimed that Letterman had caused her "mental cruelty" and "sleep deprivation" for over a decade by using code words and gestures during his network TV broadcasts.
That ridiculous TRO was dismissed last December, but according to a new report released this week by RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting), the case was not a judicial anomaly but "the logical culmination of years of ever-expanding definitions of domestic violence." RADAR is a Maryland-based think tank that specializes in exposing the excesses of the domestic violence bureaucracy.
The New Mexico statute defines domestic violence as causing "severe emotional distress." That definition was met when Ms. Nestler claimed she suffered from exhaustion and had gone bankrupt because of Letterman’s actions.
The New Mexico statute appears to limit domestic violence to "any incident by a household member," and Letterman, who lives in Connecticut and works in New York, had never been in Ms. Nestler’s household. But New Mexico law defines household member to include "a person with whom the petitioner has had a continuing personal relationship," and Ms. Nestler’s charge that Letterman’s broadcast of television messages for eleven years qualified as a "continuing" relationship and thereby turned him into a "household member." Laughing At Restraining Orders
Even ridiculous restraining orders can lead to felony jail sentences
David Letterman was in grave danger. If, by any chance, he possessed a perfectly legal firearm, he would be subject to a mandatory felony jail term, for several years, with no parole. This happened to Dr. Emerson, a successful physician, who got several jail terms and finally became a homeless vagrant.
Protection from abuse order proceedings are abusive, discriminatory violations of due process
Due process violations in the issuing of TROs include lack of notice, no presumption of innocence, denial Due process violations in the issuing of TROs include lack of notice, no presumption of innocence, denial of poor defendants to free counsel while women are given taxpayer-funded support, denial of the right to take depositions, lack of evidentiary hearings, improper standard of proof, no need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, denial of the right to confront accusers, and denial of trial by jury.
Assault and battery are already crimes in every state without any need of VAWA. TROs empower activist family court judges to criminalize a vast range of otherwise legal behavior (usually a father’s contact with his own children and entry into his own home) which are crimes only for the recipient of the order, who can then be arrested and jailed without trial for doing what no statute prohibits and what anyone else may lawfully do. Laughing At Restraining Orders
Why can’t she leave if she feels threatened? Even if he committed violence, a man’s home should be sacred. Are there no constitutional protections? This is worse then anything I have read about the worst dictatorships.
Protection from abuse order is ruinous abuse. No due process* Nor presumption of innocence.
If the request is granted (as it probably will be), the man (98% of the time it is a man, and YES, I made that number up, but it’s almost always a man) has to vacate the premises, even if it is his sole home. If he is not at the home at the time the order is granted, he is not permitted to return there. (Often the orders are granted while the guy is at work, for example). He cannot return to get his clothes, he cannot return to get his medication. He needs to go to court to get permission to return to the home. This is even if he is the owner of said residence. […]
If there is an outstanding mortgage on that residence, and he has paid it in the past, he now becomes legally obligated to continue paying the mortgage. In the past where if he had a financial crunch, he could elect to not pay the mortgage and thereby lose the house; once a protection order is in place, normally he is no longer legally able to do this, because he needs to continue paying for the house where the protected person (or persons) live. As I said it varies state by state. If he wants to stop paying, he can ask the court for permission to do so. Sometimes the court grants such a request, often it will not. Pleading poverty at this point is not a valid defense; he should have thought about that before scaring his spouse so much that she asked for a PFA. This typically means he has no money to fund a place to live for himself. This, once again, is not the court’s problem. So he goes to a friend’s sofa.
Protection From Abuse order, aka Restraining Order.
A police officer may arrest the alleged assailant, even if he/she does not witness the abuse.
A court web site confirming our claims: a woman only needs to request a restraining order, and then allege it was violated. Bingo: man in jail!
You should immediately call the police and report the violation. A police officer may arrest the alleged assailant, even if he/she does not witness the abuse. An alleged assailant charged with the contempt of a protection order can face criminal charges for the acts committed that were in violation of the order. After a hearing, the court may find the alleged assailant in contempt and sentence him/her to prison for up to six months and/or fined up to $1,000 under Pennsylvania law.
Protection from Abuse Questions & Answers | Protection from Abuse Questions & Answers
One thought on “"Protection from Abuse" (restraining) order is Abuse”