Restraining Order

Gemtun said:
I was told that if the girl came to Starbucks BEFORE her ex boyfriend, she can stay there. But if she sees her ex boyfriend there, she has to leave immediately.

So would Joe Blo have to leave resturant immediately even though his meal may not be finished???


When a restraining order is filed, isn't there a specification on how many feet you have to stay away from the person who has filed the RO against you? Like say for example, the person who receives the RO, and it's specifies that person has to keep 500 feet away from the person who filed the RO, if they both attend the same public place. I know some people don't do that, but, in this poor girl's case, this could have done that, so this poor girl wouldn't have had to go through all that embarrassment in front of her friends.
 
^Angel^ said:
Why does it make it okay for you to downright HER? after all not all cops are good ones, and maybe she was telling the truth, what makes you think that every cop out there will be so helpful?...


There are good cops and bad cops out there...
Angel,
I'm not coming down on anyone here. I asked a simple question...what specifically did she ask the cop and what was the cops reply. I never said ever cop was so helpful, but because of the scrutiny we are under by the general public, we do go a lot further than expected in a business world. I also asked that question because I know what it is like to be 'uncaring and ignoring a request for help'. In fact, I had a complaint made against me just a couple of weeks ago. I was handling a school bus accident. School bus was rear ended by a minivan.

A woman and a young child were flown out by helicopter, as well as two students on the bus.. The rest of the kids on the bus were transported by ambulances and another bus to the hospital. While all this was going on, a woman stops her van in the middle of the highway to ask for directions. I tell her to keep moving and that she can't be stopped where she is...what does she do? She continues to argue with me about giving her directions and starts calling me every name in the book and how unhelpful I am. She then files a complaint against me and is shouting that the police refused to help a little old lady. The reason I needed her to keep moving is we were clearing traffic out so more ambulances could get to the scene...yet her only concern is that I did not stop this whole operation to tell her something she could have gotten 1/2 mile down the road at the 7-11.

So, while I wasn't coming down on coloravalanche, I will ask more questions when an officer 'refuses to help' somebody....and the question was never answered anyway...what exactly was said and how did the officer refuse to help..

And coloravalanche, I did not see your PM's until today (did not get my usually notice on it)...I will read over all the pages and get back to you :)
 
^Angel^ said:
I don't know if anyone knows about A CRY FOR HELP:THE TRACY THURMAN STORY , so tell me is the cops are doing the right thing for HER?....

The only thing on the page you linked to is :

Based on a true story...Tracy Thurman was married to a man who abused her and continued to harass her after a restraining order. When he brutally beats her and slashes her throat in front of the police, she sues the city and the police department for failing to protect her. Dale Midkiff plays Buck Thurman...a not so nice guy...

Do you have any links to the real story and the movie? I'd be interested in reading more about it but all I'm finding is information on the movie. I'd like to see exactly how the police failed her against a violent spouse.
 
restraining order - are they allowed to contact each other on phone/TTY/cell mobile phone?
 
Tamara said:
restraining order - are they allowed to contact each other on phone/TTY/cell mobile phone?

After get restraining order, they are advised to change and renew numbers for phone, fax, TTY, mobile phone, emails, etc. It's their choice if they refused to change the numbers.
 
Gemtun said:
She did not understand the papers and even went to a cop to ask for information. The cop refused to explain anything to her.

I hope a girl get her rights... I hope she remember which police officer who refused to explain her.

So two hours later, her ex boyfriend showed up and saw her. So he called the cops. The cops came to arrest her in front of all these deaf people in Starbucks. She was sent to jail. Even though the girl didnt do anything to her exboyfriend - he just didnt want to see her face at the event. I know the girl personally.

*goose bumps* It must be ambarrassing for her... I hope she have good friends who support her.


I was puzzled by this because I didnt know that you could get a RO for a public event. I thought it works only if its at home or work.

Yes I'm agree with you to this. I thought it's for home and work, not public event. I'm total speechless after read your thread here. I only know that anyone must stay miles distance from area where they live or work... depend to court order how many miles they have to stay distance... and which/where they lives but public event?

I asked my girlfriend about this as her husband is a cop. She said that anyone basically can file a RO and can ask that the person not be present at certain events or places at certain time or days.

Huh? it is be supposing for Domestic voilences and stalker, also history of criminal records, etc... not that situation what you told us... *goose bumps* I feel bad for a girl.

My question is: can anyone literally abuse this? It seems like the courts would only hear one side. How can the other party defend her/him self?

Yes I am wondering about this... I hope a girl get the help to find good lawyer. What a cop did to her in public event is defamation and too embarrassing... It damage her soul and mind... I feel bad for her... :(

For instance: If I had an argument with my fiance, I could get a RO for a resturant I usually frequent so that means he can t come talk to me? Even though if it is a silly fight, nothing like abusive or stalking.

Yes, it make no sense, that' s just because a girl and her ex-boyfriend are not longer together... :ugh2:

I was abused by my ex-boyfriend in England... It's police who got him out of my apartment and advised me to go court to get RO... I did but I have to pay RO fee for a year... It's worth.


I can understand if it is used for serious causes such as abusing, stalking or harrasing but it just seems to me that this can be abused frequently.

Yes, it's law in Germany like this.

How do the courts know if it is justificable or not? I know that many get RO and get murdered anyway but I am speakign for others who file RO because of silly fighting or whatnot. How would the judges and cops know which one to take seriously? Because some cops dont bother to respond to 911 calls if RO is violated and the person gets murdered but other cops show up at events to arrest that person even though that person has not done anything to the other person filing for RO. :dunno:

Good Point, I'd like to collect experiences from here... All what I know is for Domestic volience, stalkers, etc and who are out of prision etc. I would like you to keep it update what happened to a girl... lawyer,... rights... legal....etc..
 
SherryCherish said:
depends what he wrote down on papers the location, plus about 500 feets away from that place that he request for.


But it's no sense!

RO is not free fee but charge fee for a year... I think what ex-boyfriend did out of revenge... I do not agree with that law for provide him RO without REAL reasons.
 
^Angel^ said:
I personally believe that the law should change, cause it's not right for those to get a restraining order just for revenge, it should be about safty reason, not just cause someone is mad, that's wrong

I think judge should see proof of reason before allowing someone to have a restraining order, cause people can easy abuse it just to get what they want to see this person behind the bar for the wrong reason...

:werd:


Ohio must be different cause I wasn't allow to get a restraining order unless I had filed a police report against a person, not just cause of what happened and it seem the pictures wasn't enough to prove my case....

Yes it's same with law here in Germany.

Cheri's post
That's pretty dumb to have a restraining order for something so little, Restraining order should be for those who committing any domestic violence, or harassment.

Exactly
 
coloravalanche said:
I agree with you about the girl went to starbuck first before her ex...

No, If Joe was there first...he has his right to stay and finish his meal...this isnt fair to him...If you arrive first...then that is different story...anyhow, I think resturants shouldnt be big deal...it just depends on situation...


Yes... but I think the law over RO should be change... It's for really good reason and proofs...
 
^Angel^ said:
I can see where you're coming from on this, it happened to someone I'm very close to, and the cops didn't bother hearing two side of the story, and arrest someone who was innocent by trying to defend himself....

It's sad that some cops look at men only as an abuser but don't see that some women are one too...


Yeah, it's cops's job duty is look at RO papers or whatever than listen people's side. :roll:
 
Taylor said:
The only thing on the page you linked to is :



Do you have any links to the real story and the movie? I'd be interested in reading more about it but all I'm finding is information on the movie. I'd like to see exactly how the police failed her against a violent spouse.

1985 - Thurman vs. Torrington. Tracy Thurman wins a case against Connecticut police for failing to protect her from husband’s violence when he brutally beat her and slashed her throat in front of the police, she sued the city and the police department for failing to protect her. Suit leads to CT’s passage of mandatory arrest law. The City of Torrington was notified of the "repeated threats of violence," Thurman, 595 F. Supp. at 1525, threats of death and maiming, made against Tracy Thurman by her husband Charles. The City did nothing. Then he nearly killed her by stabbing her with a knife and left her a paraplegic for life. The City was found guilty of violating her rights to equal protection of the laws and she was awarded 2.3 million dollars.



Thurman v. City of Torrington

Tracy Thurman case


Cry For Help


Fight For Justice


Nineteen years ago, a woman named Tracey Thurman was nearly beaten to death in Torrington, Connecticut, before the police came to her aid. Though Thurman had reported her estranged husband's threats and harassment to the police repeatedly for over a year, it wasn't until she called in utter desperation, fearing for her life, that the police responded. They sent only one officer, however, who arrived 25 minutes after the call was placed, pulled up across the street from Thurman's house, and sat in his car while Thurman's husband chased her across the yard, slashed her with a knife, stabbed her in the neck, knocked her to the ground, and then stabbed her 12 more times.

Permanently disfigured, Tracey Thurman brought what became a landmark case to the Supreme Court, which found that the city police had violated her 14th Amendment right to "equal protection of the laws" and awarded her $2.3 million in compensatory damages. Almost immediately, the State of Connecticut adopted a new, comprehensive domestic-violence law calling for the arrest of assaultive spouses. In the year after the measure took effect, the number of arrests for domestic assault increased 92 percent, from 12,400 to 23,830.
 
If there's a problem in the system.. why not team up and convince the people responsible for making changes in it? :D We are powerful!
 
Liebling said:
Tamara said:
restraining order - are they allowed to contact each other on phone/TTY/cell mobile phone?


After get restraining order, they are advised to change and renew numbers for phone, fax, TTY, mobile phone, emails, etc. It's their choice if they refused to change the numbers.
That’s not true. According to restraining orders here in the states, the person who has an order against them is not to initiate any contact with their victim, including phone calls. To do so is a direct violation of the order and could be punishable by law.
However, as Taylor stated, if the victim allows the communication, the order becomes worthless.

One thing I would like to point out is that there is a huge difference between a “restraining order” and a “protective order”. Most courts will tell you that a “restraining order” isn’t worth the paper it is written on. While anyone can get a “restraining order”, “protective orders” are generally reserved for domestic issues (familial) and they are generally more strictly enforced.
 
That's stupid.. a restraining order should be put on only for domestic violence and stalkings..not when the bf and gf are no longer together or revenage.. etc.. the laws should be more strict on it.. we should do something about it together!
 
Angel,
Thank You for the information on that case. I was not familiar with that particular story, however, I am familiar with many of the changes that came about because of that case. Thank You for providing more information...I have some reading to do tonight ;)
 
I've been reading all the posts on the restraining order issue. I agree that it's wrong to arrest someone who went to a public event way before the person who issued the RO because it's open to the public.

I currently have a RO against my ex fiance. I broke up with him because he was abusive and then things started getting worse. My money was stolen, my cat was killed, he threatened to kill himself in front of me and then I finally had it so I moved out to another city. Then one morning I found that all 4 tires on my truck were slashed and on another day my truck was keyed really bad. (he knows where I live) so I went and got a RO against him. He is to have NO absolutely NO contact with me, not even on AIM, phone, e-mail, or through a friend. If he does then I have the right to report him. When i got my temporary RO, he contacted me on AIM so I reported him and the police arrested him and he had to serve 6 months in jail. He has a suspended sentence of 3 years and probation for 5 years and if he tries to contact me, he will be put back in jail for the remaining 3 years. He will be released this May 5th and honestly I'm TERRIFIED! I've been working on a safety plan and coming up with ways to defend myself in case if he comes after me with intent to hurt me. Anyways back to the point, the RO did not say anything about public events but I asked the judge for clarification and he said that he will be allowed to attend public events that I go to as long as he does not approach me. I guess it depends on the state law.
 
Eyeth said:
I'm sure you're aware that such TRO's/RO's are made under penalty of perjury? I'd like to think that they still count for something. Plus, a RO would be more 'legitimate', as it would be litigated with both sides participating. (A TRO is an ex parte proceeding.)

Unfortunately the Orange County's DA office is packed with feminists who make it next to impossible to file perjury claims associated with TRO's.

Richard
 
Eve said:
That’s not true. According to restraining orders here in the states, the person who has an order against them is not to initiate any contact with their victim, including phone calls. To do so is a direct violation of the order and could be punishable by law.

Yes, correct but I guess we were being recommended for our safety. I remember police advised (I would say "suggest") me to change door keys, phone numbers etc. if I have one and recommend me to get Restraining Order. It´s my choice if I don´t want... Sure, I get protection if I have Restraining Order but police can´t be there for me 24 hours that´s why they make sure for my safety.

However, as Taylor stated, if the victim allows the communication, the order becomes worthless.

Yes exactly


One thing I would like to point out is that there is a huge difference between a “restraining order” and a “protective order”. Most courts will tell you that a “restraining order” isn’t worth the paper it is written on. While anyone can get a “restraining order”, “protective orders” are generally reserved for domestic issues (familial) and they are generally more strictly enforced.

I didnt know that there´re difference between restraining and protective orders. Do you mean that restraining order is for temparily and protective order is for permanetly... Correct?

I know I can hold restraining order up to a year.

As what you says that restraining order is worthless for most courts but why police see different?

 
Angel, it sound interesting... You make me feel want to see it... I will look for DVD at large DVD stores this weekends.
 
Back
Top