Restraining Order

G

Gemtun

Guest
There has been a few threads pertaining to restraining orders so I thought I would post one as I have a few questions. Perhaps Taylor can enlighten me.

Last Friday, a deaf girl showed up at Starbucks for monthly Deaf event. She brought a copy of restraining order that her ex boyfriend had on her, forbidding her to be at Starbucks for Deaf event. She did not understand the papers and even went to a cop to ask for information. The cop refused to explain anything to 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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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:
 
That is bizarre, but so are many deaf people too!

Weird...........there's also so many stories of even deaf groups just lying and lying and lying and lying, and it's just as bizarre.
 
Gemtun said:
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.
Click to expand...

Here’s another question for Taylor when he pops in. Let’s say that I have a restraining order against Joe Blo. I walk into a restaurant and Mr. Blo is sitting there eating dinner. Does that mean that Mr. Blo has to leave the restaurant?
 
Dannie said:
That is bizarre, but so are many deaf people too!

Weird...........there's also so many stories of even deaf groups just lying and lying and lying and lying, and it's just as bizarre.
Click to expand...

I know - that is what is puzzling me. How can courts determine if one gets a RO or not? Do they need massive evidence?

The cops who showed up to arrest this girl coudlnt believe that the girl did not understand the papers. We tried to explain that ASL is the girl's native language, not English. But they arrested her anyway. Her kids were there. How sad
 
Levonian said:
Here’s another question for Taylor when he pops in. Let’s say that I have a restraining order against Joe Blo. I walk into a restaurant and Mr. Blo is sitting there eating dinner. Does that mean that Mr. Blo has to leave the restaurant?
Click to expand...

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???
 
From what I understand, a person who has a RO against them can counter file it if the person who filed it to begin with violates it. Taylor, what's up with this?
 
Last Friday, a deaf girl showed up at Starbucks for monthly Deaf event. She brought a copy of restraining order that her ex boyfriend had on her, forbidding her to be at Starbucks for Deaf event. She did not understand the papers and even went to a cop to ask for information. The cop refused to explain anything to her.
Click to expand...

The girl should sued the police dept for not willing to explain or help her to understand~

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.
Click to expand...

First of all, her ex boyfriend is JACKASS! She was there FIRST! She has her rights to attend at any deaf events or deaf church...it is not right for her ex boyfriend calling cop and have her arrested...It is not right! Pls tell your friend (girl) to file lawsuit against her ex boyfriend and the cop...plus to have witnesses at the Starbuck to tell the court that she did not do anything wrong....She needs to fight for her rights!

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.
Click to expand...

I disagree...for instance: Last year, I arrived at Deaf Revival Camp...Ive been attending there every year and everyone knows me well...anyway, my ex hubby visited there about 3 times in the past...so when I saw my ex hubby showed up at the camp...He was not supposed to be at where I attend...the director kindly asked him to leave...so he left...

It just depends on the situation...since your friend showed up at Starbuck first...then her ex boyfriend has no right to get rid of her when he showed up 2 hours later...
 
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???
Click to expand...

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...
 
coloravalanche said:
INo, 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...
Click to expand...

You say resturants shouldnt be big deal but apparently police found it serious enough to arrest the girl at Starbucks.

Her ex boyfriend wrote down specifically all deaf events for RO so that the girl cannot attend ANY events so he can go there without seeing her face.

Another girl I knew did file a RO against her lover - so her lover couldnt attend any events for a year even though what they had was just a messy breakup. Then after a year, she went to a deaf event and was arrested as she didnt know that this girl filed RO for another year even though they have not spoken or anything for entire year prior to second RO.
 
depends what he wrote down on papers the location, plus about 500 feets away from that place that he request for.
 
SherryCherish said:
depends what he wrote down on papers the location, plus about 500 feets away from that place that he request for.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand but how do cops or courts know that this person is really telling the truth? What are the criteria for cops and courts to determine that this is a legitimate reason to file for a RO? I see people abusing this system like this ex boyfriend for example. I am not referring to serious case such as stalking or harassing. My heart does go out to real victims who did file for RO but ended up murdered or abused even more.
 
Gemtun said:
Yes I understand but how do cops or courts know that this person is really telling the truth? What are the criteria for cops and courts to determine that this is a legitimate reason to file for a RO? I see people abusing this system like this ex boyfriend for example. I am not referring to serious case such as stalking or harassing. My heart does go out to real victims who did file for RO but ended up murdered or abused even more.
Click to expand...


I understand your perspective...However, there are real or unreal victims who file for RO....I will share with you all about my bad experienced with these damn 9 deafies who filed RO against me and they were NOT victims...they did it to destroyed my reputation and life as well...what they did was evil and cruel...Luckly not all 9 deafies win their cases against me...There were only 3 deafies who were granted by the Judge but other 6 deafies lost!

You all have no clue what Ive been through! These 9 deafies were NOT victims and they lied to the judge against me...I will share with my story later this week...okay?
 
Generally speaking, RO's are usually made 'ex parte', meaning the judge only listens to one side requesting the RO. Usually, this manuever is successful, resulting in a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the other party.

However, to make it stick, making it a permanent RO, the other party can contest it in court and the judge will then decide on the particulars of the RO, i.e., certain events, home, office, children visitation, etc.
 
can anyone literally abuse this? It seems like the courts would only hear one side. How can the other party defend her/him self?
Click to expand...
Don't even get me started on this! I think a RO is a great tool, but I mean at my college, it was ABUSED to the MAX!!!! People would get mad at their "friends" and then file restraining orders on them, for revenge......and trust me, it was very difficult to get public safety to undy that perhaps the people who filed them were crackheads!
 
From my understanding..... a RO does not physically protect you from harm. The RO is a piece of paper that is applied and used in the legal arena when you show up in court if he violates the RO order but really, there is no real physical protection from a man who is not gonna stop until you are dead so basically it is a kill or be killed situation which means you have to arm yourself with a gun which many women are hesitant to have a gun and get killed anyways all because the women don't want a gun and the abusive men laugh wickedly and wipe beer off their mouth over this simple fact that would really have saved her life if she bought a gun and shooting somebody in self defense is alots better than having to put up a life and death physical confrontation which most women are not prepared for a really vicious physical violent situation and evil men take advantage of this simple fact.

Violence belongs in the man's world. ( for wartime use and self defense )

Violence is not to be un-leashed on women or children at all !!!!! :nono:

Women and children can learn self defense but just remember that evil men will be punished by good men.
 
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.


That really sucks for the girl, because if the guy shows up to any public events, Usually you must remain at least 100 yards from the victim at all times when someone has a restraining order on you. But, if the girl was there just for the public event, and as long she is not harassing him, then It should have been all right. That's strange that she was arrested when she had no idea that she wasn't allow to be at any public events where this guy goes. It's not like she was following him, She was there first wasn't she?
 
This is werid cause I wasn't allow to get a restraining order because there was never a police report on my ex husband in the past, how can anyone allow to get one even if there was no history of police report that was ever filed on any abuse, domestic violence, or harassment etc?...I thought the judge needs proof in order for that person to get a restraining order...
 
Just like the Bogeyman cant be within 25 feet of Booker T or Hes gonna SUE Theodore Long if bogeyman comes within 25 feet of him. :deal:
Booker T has a Restraining Order barring bogeyman comes within 25 feet of him.
 
deafdyke said:
Don't even get me started on this! I think a RO is a great tool, but I mean at my college, it was ABUSED to the MAX!!!! People would get mad at their "friends" and then file restraining orders on them, for revenge......and trust me, it was very difficult to get public safety to undy that perhaps the people who filed them were crackheads!
Click to expand...


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...


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....
 
^Angel^ said:
This is werid cause I wasn't allow to get a restraining order because there was never a police report on my ex husband in the past, how can anyone allow to get one even if there was no history of police report that was ever filed on any abuse, domestic violence, or harassment etc?...I thought the judge needs proof in order for that person to get a restraining order...
Click to expand...

I agree with you Angel...Like I said in this early post...I had 9 deafies who filed RO against me for NO REASON! They did not report to the police! They just filed the paper and send me court!

I will share with my story later this week...
 
Back
Top