I said yesterday that the AWFLs would drop the attacks on the Lone Standout after discovering he was black. It turns out that I was wrong. They will protect their own even more so than they protect the slaves on their plantation.
They are investigating and attacking the guy. The latest attack includes references to his having a domestic violence restraining order. These DV restraining orders are bullshit that women frequently use as a weapon in divorces or just to get even with a man who has done something they don’t like. I have twice been accused of this by angry ex-girlfriends who were trying to get revenge on me for daring to be their ex:
- In the first case, the woman used it in an attempt to extort cash from me, and a cop told her how to do it.
- In the second case, the woman learned about it from me after I had foolishly told her about the first time. She made all sorts of claims about things that she claimed I did. The big thing that saved me was that I had proof that I wasn’t even in the country when some of the events supposedly took place.
the law is abused. Here are the disturbing statistics:
25% of all divorces include accusations of domestic violence.
50% of all domestic violence restraining orders are issued without allegations of violence.
70% of domestic violence restraining orders are trivial or false. (PDF warning)
85% of restraining orders are against men
In fact, a New Mexico woman filed a restraining order against David Letterman in 2005, alleging that she was a victim of his domestic abuse. He had never met the woman. She said that he was using secret code words during his television show to threaten her. The judge in the case found her claims to have merit and granted the order, even though it was later overturned.
To me, if there is no accompanying criminal charge for domestic violence, then the entire issue is a woman making things up because she is a mad cow. The way it works, is a woman accuses a man of domestic violence. She is granted an ex parte hearing, where her accusations are all the court hears. If the court agrees that the claim has merit, the DV order is issued. The first hint a man has that one of these has been issued is when the cops show up with the order, which includes suspension of any concealed weapons permits, and an order that he turn his guns into the police within 48 hours.
Then he gets a hearing sometime in the next couple of weeks. He had better bring a lawyer, because she will have one, provided free of charge by the taxpayers. If he loses, the order becomes permanent, and he is now prohibited from owning firearms or ammunition. For life.
Most men don’t fight it because it costs money to hire a lawyer, money they don’t have. They figure they are never going to see her again, so what’s the big deal. Most don’t find out they are prohibited persons until after it is too late.
The law says that women can make an accusation of domestic violence and the court will punish the man by issuing a restraining order without him being allowed to defend himself. He gets a hearing two weeks later, but by that time his guns have been taken and his concealed weapons permit revoked. There is no fee for the woman to do this.
She gets a free lawyer. He does not. When it is discovered that she lied, nothing happens to her. She will not be prosecuted, and cannot be sued or punished in any way.
The Florida State Supreme Court has this to say on the matter:
Unfortunately, the current version of section 784.046 does not seem to permit the trial court to simply dismiss a sworn petition that does not allege facts that fall within the statutory language. Instead, section 784.046(5) requires that “[u]pon the filing of the petition, the court shall set a hearing to be held at the earliest possible time.” The result is the use of scant judicial resources to conduct unnecessary hearings based on pleadings that could never support the issuance of an injunction. These same hearings often serve only to inflame the parties’ emotions and foster further uncivil behavior. I would encourage the legislature to consider amending the domestic violence and repeat violence statutes to allow judges to dismiss petitions that, on their face, do not contain allegations sufficient to meet the statutory requirements without prejudice to the petitioner refiling a legally sufficient petition if he or she can do so.
Women who lie to use the law as a weapon cannot be punished. From the same decision:
Further, nowhere in section 784.046 is there any provision for an award of sanctions against a petitioner who uses the statutory provisions concerning injunctions as a sword rather than a shield.
The message is loud and clear- you will do what the AWFLs say, as a jury member, you will do whatever they want, or they will destroy your life.
At the end of the day, this is jury tampering. I don’t see how this is any different than a criminal threatening a witness.
Intimidation of a juror in Mass:
Using a juror’s identity or personal information to intimidate, harass, threaten, mislead, or retaliate against the juror (or their family) is a felony under G.L. c. 268, § 13B (intimidation of a juror). This covers both during and after a trial if the intent is to interfere with or punish participation in the proceeding.
Penalty:
- Up to 10 years in state prison, or
- Up to 2½ years in a house of correction, and/or
- Fine of $1,000–$5,000.
- If the underlying case involved a crime punishable by life imprisonment, the maximum prison term rises to 20 years.
This campaign to dox and harass this guy is nothing short of jury tampering, and is a felony.
0 Comments