5 ms·

An emergency protective order is usually given with no verification because it's much better to give one out incorrectly then to fail to give when you you shoul

An emergency protective order is usually given with no verification because it's much better to give one out incorrectly then to fail to give when you you should have. But those are only pending a court date, a few weeks at most. A "real" one is issued by a judge after interviewing both parties (or by default if one doesn't show up) and those are very reliably real. I don't know anything about the letterman thing. If it was an emergency one yeah you don't want to read too much into it. The real ones though are very reliable indicators that something fucked up went down.

salamanderss 3y ago
> The real ones though are very reliable indicators that something fucked up went down. Any numbers on how much more reliable they are after the initial order kicks you out of the spousal home and asks you to get a lawyer while navigating being homeless and losing access to assets in your house and any evidence inside? It's hard to believe the short hearing a couple weeks later with pretty low standard of evidence with you now at a severe disadvantage is that much more accurate.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  Are you speaking from personal experience? Because I've lived through exactly that, and I still understand protective orders as one of the most effective ways to prevent intimate partner murders.
  - 15155 3y ago
    Why would someone who intends to commit murder care about a misdemeanor status offense?
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - 15155 3y ago
        > Could you please go learn something about this subject before you talk out your ass about it. I didn't intend to upset you. How many of these cases have you tried? Where do you practice, exactly? > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
        feoren 3y ago
        You're using armchair logic, which can justify anything. giraffe_lady already said: > I've lived through exactly that So your 100% snarky comment about how she's not a practicing lawyer and therefore can't know anything about it is pretty off key, especially when you're literally quoting "don't be snarky". You're both swiping at each other; don't quote the rules at someone when you're not applying them to yourself.
        15155 3y ago
        Where did I say: "she's not a practicing lawyer and therefore can't know anything about it?" To preface: I had/have absolutely no idea if "she" is a "she," what she is, where she is, her level of professional expertise or profession. I am human, I don't know everything, everywhere: the distinct possibility exists that whatever jurisdiction this individual is in has laws, customs unbeknownst to me. This person insinuated that I was "talking out my ass," implied my hard-earned knowledge and experience was obtained from a "mens rights subreddit" as a way to dismiss my statements.
      - ipaddr 3y ago
        What happens often is this causes the escalation. Trying to make this into a reddit issue and claiming information backing up your point is everywhere is weak and you lose credibility. Produce the studies or let your argument devolve into hearsay
    - compiler-guy 3y ago
      Because these crimes are often not preplanned and come out of bad situations that start comparatively cool, and then escalate out of control. By preventing the situation prior to the escalation, the more serious events don’t happen as often.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > I still understand protective orders as one of the most effective ways to prevent intimate partner murders I don't see how that makes them a reliable indicator that something went down. That could be true even if 99% of restraining orders were against innocent people.
FireBeyond 3y ago
> A "real" one is issued by a judge after interviewing both parties (or by default if one doesn't show up) and those are very reliably real. Why? Based on one party being able to tell a more convincing story than another?
- 15155 3y ago
  Based on whatever fake text message screenshots, sob story, crying children, paid witnesses can convince the judge that some potential threat exists beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
  - lelanthran 3y ago
    > Based on whatever fake text message screenshots, sob story, crying children, paid witnesses You don't need any of that. Allegations are enough.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  Yes. Assuming you're willing to purjure yourself, this is basically the full time job of a family court judge and they're much more practiced at figuring it out than a normal person would be. You'd be hard pressed to find a person with less confidence in our "justice" system than I have. And as I mentioned in another comment, I have, unlike almost everyone else here, actually been on the receiving end of a misuse of this system. I still find it overall pretty reliable and the best mechanism we currently have for reducing intimate partner violence, one of the most common ways for women to be murdered.
  - 15155 3y ago
    It's civil court: can you please give me some Lexis cites on any case you are aware of for someone being prosecuted for perjury incident to evidence forged in a PPO hearing? I've witnessed 100+ of these hearings: they are a disgrace to our justice system. Evidentiary standards are a joke, and thankfully, get absolutely smoked upon appeal 9/10 times - instant suppression. It's wonderful that they may have helped you at one point. You keep citing this "intimate spousal murder" schtick with zero non-anecdotal citations (try proving a negative.) Can we please see some formal, peer-reviewed evidence to suggest that someone willing to commit murder is going to be deterred by a DUI-equivalent?
15155 3y ago
> A "real" one is issued by a judge after interviewing both parties A judge who doesn't want something bad to happen, under any circumstances. Therefore, they are extremely likely just to issue a PPO "just because." > The real ones though are very reliable indicators that something fucked up went down. TPOs/PPOs are absolutely not reliable: In most states, they are civil and issued subject to a preponderance of the evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence is not subject to any verification or real evidentiary standards: you could fake text message screenshots all day long and net a PPO before you ever had an issue with perjury. FWIW: someone with ill/violent intent couldn't care less about a random status violation that would pale in comparative severity to whatever other crime they wanted to commit.
- enragedcacti 3y ago
  > FWIW: someone with ill/violent intent couldn't care less about a random status violation that would pale in comparative severity to whatever other crime they wanted to commit. Violence in general and domestic violence especially are not always premeditated. What starts as an attempt by the abuser to hash things out can devolve into violence. A protective order can stop abusers from making the attempt in the first place, and when there is an attempt they can help the victim get more immediate help from law enforcement.
  - salamanderss 3y ago
    And of course nothing calms an abuser down like being set loose without a proper conviction, now with the ire of being dispossessed perhaps rightly of children and home. Convict and jail them, with the full rights and penalties that go with that. Not this halfass paper shield against an otherwise free person.
    - enragedcacti 3y ago
      > And of course nothing calms an abuser down like being set loose without a proper conviction, now with the ire of being dispossessed perhaps rightly of children and home. Absolutely, some murders do seem to be triggered by protection orders. Presumably those cases would also occur when they are charged with a crime with cooperation from the victim. Are we going to instead consider pretrial detention for all cases of accused DV? And wouldn't that have all of the same issues with a lower standard of evidence but infringe even more on their rights? Edit: I should clarify, when charges are filed we should consider pretrial detention. Unfortunately there are tons of reasons why DV victims often end up not wanting to press charges, or when someone is charged, not wanting to cooperate with prosecutors. Creating a situation where their only avenue for safety is pressing charges and cooperating with authorities creates its own set of issues and I feel they still deserve some level of safety even if they don't cooperate with criminal charges.

salamanderss 3y ago

> The real ones though are very reliable indicators that something fucked up went down. Any numbers on how much more reliable they are after the initial order kicks you out of the spousal home and asks you to get a lawyer while navigating being homeless and losing access to assets in your house and any evidence inside? It's hard to believe the short hearing a couple weeks later with pretty low standard of evidence with you now at a severe disadvantage is that much more accurate.

giraffe_lady 3y ago
Are you speaking from personal experience? Because I've lived through exactly that, and I still understand protective orders as one of the most effective ways to prevent intimate partner murders.
- 15155 3y ago
  Why would someone who intends to commit murder care about a misdemeanor status offense?
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - 15155 3y ago
      > Could you please go learn something about this subject before you talk out your ass about it. I didn't intend to upset you. How many of these cases have you tried? Where do you practice, exactly? > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
      - feoren 3y ago
        You're using armchair logic, which can justify anything. giraffe_lady already said: > I've lived through exactly that So your 100% snarky comment about how she's not a practicing lawyer and therefore can't know anything about it is pretty off key, especially when you're literally quoting "don't be snarky". You're both swiping at each other; don't quote the rules at someone when you're not applying them to yourself.
        15155 3y ago
        Where did I say: "she's not a practicing lawyer and therefore can't know anything about it?" To preface: I had/have absolutely no idea if "she" is a "she," what she is, where she is, her level of professional expertise or profession. I am human, I don't know everything, everywhere: the distinct possibility exists that whatever jurisdiction this individual is in has laws, customs unbeknownst to me. This person insinuated that I was "talking out my ass," implied my hard-earned knowledge and experience was obtained from a "mens rights subreddit" as a way to dismiss my statements.
    - ipaddr 3y ago
      What happens often is this causes the escalation. Trying to make this into a reddit issue and claiming information backing up your point is everywhere is weak and you lose credibility. Produce the studies or let your argument devolve into hearsay
  - compiler-guy 3y ago
    Because these crimes are often not preplanned and come out of bad situations that start comparatively cool, and then escalate out of control. By preventing the situation prior to the escalation, the more serious events don’t happen as often.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > I still understand protective orders as one of the most effective ways to prevent intimate partner murders I don't see how that makes them a reliable indicator that something went down. That could be true even if 99% of restraining orders were against innocent people.

FireBeyond 3y ago

> A "real" one is issued by a judge after interviewing both parties (or by default if one doesn't show up) and those are very reliably real. Why? Based on one party being able to tell a more convincing story than another?

15155 3y ago
Based on whatever fake text message screenshots, sob story, crying children, paid witnesses can convince the judge that some potential threat exists beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
- lelanthran 3y ago
  > Based on whatever fake text message screenshots, sob story, crying children, paid witnesses You don't need any of that. Allegations are enough.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
Yes. Assuming you're willing to purjure yourself, this is basically the full time job of a family court judge and they're much more practiced at figuring it out than a normal person would be. You'd be hard pressed to find a person with less confidence in our "justice" system than I have. And as I mentioned in another comment, I have, unlike almost everyone else here, actually been on the receiving end of a misuse of this system. I still find it overall pretty reliable and the best mechanism we currently have for reducing intimate partner violence, one of the most common ways for women to be murdered.
- 15155 3y ago
  It's civil court: can you please give me some Lexis cites on any case you are aware of for someone being prosecuted for perjury incident to evidence forged in a PPO hearing? I've witnessed 100+ of these hearings: they are a disgrace to our justice system. Evidentiary standards are a joke, and thankfully, get absolutely smoked upon appeal 9/10 times - instant suppression. It's wonderful that they may have helped you at one point. You keep citing this "intimate spousal murder" schtick with zero non-anecdotal citations (try proving a negative.) Can we please see some formal, peer-reviewed evidence to suggest that someone willing to commit murder is going to be deterred by a DUI-equivalent?

15155 3y ago

> A "real" one is issued by a judge after interviewing both parties A judge who doesn't want something bad to happen, under any circumstances. Therefore, they are extremely likely just to issue a PPO "just because." > The real ones though are very reliable indicators that something fucked up went down. TPOs/PPOs are absolutely not reliable: In most states, they are civil and issued subject to a preponderance of the evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence is not subject to any verification or real evidentiary standards: you could fake text message screenshots all day long and net a PPO before you ever had an issue with perjury. FWIW: someone with ill/violent intent couldn't care less about a random status violation that would pale in comparative severity to whatever other crime they wanted to commit.

enragedcacti 3y ago
> FWIW: someone with ill/violent intent couldn't care less about a random status violation that would pale in comparative severity to whatever other crime they wanted to commit. Violence in general and domestic violence especially are not always premeditated. What starts as an attempt by the abuser to hash things out can devolve into violence. A protective order can stop abusers from making the attempt in the first place, and when there is an attempt they can help the victim get more immediate help from law enforcement.
- salamanderss 3y ago
  And of course nothing calms an abuser down like being set loose without a proper conviction, now with the ire of being dispossessed perhaps rightly of children and home. Convict and jail them, with the full rights and penalties that go with that. Not this halfass paper shield against an otherwise free person.
  - enragedcacti 3y ago
    > And of course nothing calms an abuser down like being set loose without a proper conviction, now with the ire of being dispossessed perhaps rightly of children and home. Absolutely, some murders do seem to be triggered by protection orders. Presumably those cases would also occur when they are charged with a crime with cooperation from the victim. Are we going to instead consider pretrial detention for all cases of accused DV? And wouldn't that have all of the same issues with a lower standard of evidence but infringe even more on their rights? Edit: I should clarify, when charges are filed we should consider pretrial detention. Unfortunately there are tons of reasons why DV victims often end up not wanting to press charges, or when someone is charged, not wanting to cooperate with prosecutors. Creating a situation where their only avenue for safety is pressing charges and cooperating with authorities creates its own set of issues and I feel they still deserve some level of safety even if they don't cooperate with criminal charges.