Epidemic of false protective orders and gun rights

dgapilot said:

Seems to happen much more often. I've even seen where a guys marriied mistress filed a PO and constantly harrasses him. As has been said, he who files the PO first has a better chance of being victorious.

Click to expand...

Maybe the first step to staying out of trouble was not to have a married mistress.

Cheating on your spouse or with another's spouse only leads to trouble, hurt and pain.

Huckleberry said:

Maybe the first step to staying out of trouble was not to have a married mistress.

Cheating on your spouse or with another's spouse only leads to trouble, hurt and pain.

Click to expand...

Stop making sense.

RoadDawg said:

Wait a minute here...

Did you...

Ummmm...

Did I just read...

WTH...


DID YOU JUST TAKE SIDES WIFF DA PO PO?



Brrrrrrrr

j/k

Click to expand...

I try to call balls and strikes…let me know if I goof that up.

My beef is usually about department policy and culture set by higher ups trying to chummy up to politicians who do not respect our rights.

Corporal Doug said:

Oh we have? Interesting narrow perspective. I'm sorry, I fail to see how it's the po-po's fault that your Ex is a vindictive biatch just like 90% of all women. It sucks that women always get the sympathy thrown at them over BS, but that's what we get with equal rights and the 1st amendment. I also like how you called your 2-year old an "it".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

When did the poster you qouted, "theBert", refer to his 2 year old as an "it"?

I've seen both sides of this. I've seen where the woman was being vindictive and I have seen where the woman was being abused. I've seen where the woman being abused dropped the protective order because she was financially dependent on the man and then she got abused again.

The problem with domestics is that sometimes, the woman and even children end up getting killed. Plenty of cases where the judge was too lenient on the abuser and next thing you know, somebody is dead. Plenty of times where a judge has allowed a father to have unsupervised visitation that results in the death of children. Pretty sure I can google tons of horrific domestic violence articles. Googled "Cops killed in domestic violence matters" a couple weeks ago and the number of hits was astounding.

Judges are also not God. They have no idea what the heck is going on other than what evidence is being presented to them.

Domestic violence SUCKS. Thing is, how does society deal with it? Kind of like how does society deal with the poor?

boundlessdyad said:

It is still MD, a lawsuit won't do sh1t. She will stick to her story and the lawsuit will be a waste of time and money. I do agree however that the LEO's are not at fault.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't LEO's sworn to protect and defend and are sworn to uphold the Constitution? Just like the military, aren't they obligated to refuse unlawful orders?

I proudly support our LEO's, but at some point if this appears to be a trend, isn't it the police administration's duty to insure rights aren't being violated and people are still assumed to be innocent?

Oath Keepers

Judge denies husband's request for protective order, wife shoots husband afterward:

http://helenair.com/news/local/prot...cle_34a52548-f62b-11e0-8e0b-001cc4c002e0.html

Two judges deny restraining order and then husband shoots wife:

http://myfox8.com/2013/09/06/two-judges-denied-shooting-victim-a-restraining-order/

I can spend all night searching and posting links wherein domestic violence has resulted in the death of somebody.

I was in district court several years ago where an attorney was making an argument of self defense on behalf of his client. The incident happened while a couple was leaving a restaurant in Rockville. His client was at least 6' and 220+ pounds. His wife was about 5' 2" and maybe 140. His argument was that his wife pushed him and he struck her in defense. He literally split her lip open, bruised the entire side of her face, and knocked her out. He was found guilty. This is the sort of stuff that judges have to deal with every day and they do not know the respondent to a protective order any more than they know the person asking for the protective order.

What we have is an epidemic of violence on our hands, that the Courts and law enforcement just cannot handle.

TxAggie said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't LEO's sworn to protect and defend and are sworn to uphold the Constitution? Just like the military, aren't they obligated to refuse unlawful orders?

I proudly support our LEO's, but at some point if this appears to be a trend, isn't it the police administration's duty to insure rights aren't being violated and people are still assumed to be innocent?

Oath Keepers

Click to expand...

I hear you and tend to agree however in practice I personally have never seen or heard of anyone in Law Enforcement/Corrections/Military refusing an "unlawful" order. Have you? If they have been convinced that it is a lawful order because they don't have the aptitude or desire to understand the oath they took, what then?

fabsroman said:

Judge denies husband's request for protective order, wife shoots husband afterward:

http://helenair.com/news/local/prot...cle_34a52548-f62b-11e0-8e0b-001cc4c002e0.html

Two judges deny restraining order and then husband shoots wife:

http://myfox8.com/2013/09/06/two-judges-denied-shooting-victim-a-restraining-order/

I can spend all night searching and posting links wherein domestic violence has resulted in the death of somebody.

I was in district court several years ago where an attorney was making an argument of self defense on behalf of his client. The incident happened while a couple was leaving a restaurant in Rockville. His client was at least 6' and 220+ pounds. His wife was about 5' 2" and maybe 140. His argument was that his wife pushed him and he struck her in defense. He literally split her lip open, bruised the entire side of her face, and knocked her out. He was found guilty. This is the sort of stuff that judges have to deal with every day and they do not know the respondent to a protective order any more than they know the person asking for the protective order.

What we have is an epidemic of violence on our hands, that the Courts and law enforcement just cannot handle.

Click to expand...

I certainly hope you recognize the Protective Order process is easily abused as it is now. There is clearly NO NEED to make it even easier to abuse as is the case with pending legislation (which will pass I am sure). District Court Commissioners are often not the brightest or most caring bunch of people. These cases should have to go before a Judge IMHO. I agree "real" domestic violence is a shameful, horrible act. The system needs some kind of checks and balances to protect against false claims.

fabsroman said:

When did the poster you qouted, "theBert", refer to his 2 year old as an "it"?

Click to expand...

Oops, that was meant for the original post. My apologies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

boundlessdyad said:

I certainly hope you recognize the Protective Order process is easily abused as it is now. There is clearly NO NEED to make it even easier to abuse as is the case with pending legislation (which will pass I am sure). District Court Commissioners are often not the brightest or most caring bunch of people. These cases should have to go before a Judge IMHO. I agree "real" domestic violence is a shameful, horrible act. The system needs some kind of checks and balances to protect against false claims.

Click to expand...

I know what the protective order process is. I have represented clients on both sides of it. Quite a shame that people just cannot act civil to one another anymore. Even more shameful that things result in violence versus having a judge make a determination.

Had no idea that a Commissioner could sign off on a Protective Order or a Peace Order. All the ones I have been involved in have been in front of a Judge. Now, an emergency hearing can be had for one, but I still have never had that in front of a Commissioner.

Are games played in this process? Sure. Are a good number of the requests legitimate. Sure. Thing is, what is the solution?

I wish it was something as simple as an attorney or FFL taking possession of the person's firearms that is subject to a protective order. I understand that hardship that occurs when a protective order is granted wrongly against a gun owner. Problem is, what happens when one is wrongly denied against a gun owner and that person has in fact been abusive to the Petitioner?

So, if they want to make it easier for a Protective Order to be entered against somebody, they should put in some options wherein a gun owner may surrender his/her firearms to an attorney, fiduciary, FFL, dealer, or what have you in lieu of selling them or turning them into the police. This should be the case even with the current protective order process.

Imagine having a protective order entered against you when you legally own items that have now been legally banned by SB281. You can no longer possess them, cannot legally transfer them to somebody and have them transfer them back to you in this state, and if you sell them you will never be able to get them back in this state.

This is something that should be addressed, regardless of whether this new bill passes or not.

I also hate how somebody can be prohibited for life if they are convicted of stealing $5 on two occasions and then convicted of stealing $101 on a third occasion. There are a lot of crimes that make a person prohibited in this nation that I think have ZERO bearing on whether the person is a violent criminal.

Yeah, I have a laundry list of 2nd Amendment issues that irritate the heck out of me in this state and this nation. I'll wait until the momentum is swinging our way though and we can go on offense instead of playing defense.

Heil Furher America! Sad.... I couldn't want for a second revolution in America. It had past the due.

boundlessdyad said:

District Court Commissioners are often not the brightest or most caring bunch of people. These cases should have to go before a Judge IMHO

Click to expand...

So what do you propose for abuses, stalkings, harassments etc that don't happen when the court is in session? Good luck getting the court system to put a judge on duty for 24/7 coverage.

fabsroman said:

I've seen both sides of this. I've seen where the woman was being vindictive and I have seen where the woman was being abused. I've seen where the woman being abused dropped the protective order because she was financially dependent on the man and then she got abused again.

The problem with domestics is that sometimes, the woman and even children end up getting killed. Plenty of cases where the judge was too lenient on the abuser and next thing you know, somebody is dead. Plenty of times where a judge has allowed a father to have unsupervised visitation that results in the death of children. Pretty sure I can google tons of horrific domestic violence articles. Googled "Cops killed in domestic violence matters" a couple weeks ago and the number of hits was astounding.

Judges are also not God. They have no idea what the heck is going on other than what evidence is being presented to them.

Domestic violence SUCKS. Thing is, how does society deal with it? Kind of like how does society deal with the poor?

Click to expand...

This.

I've been involved with 2 cases where POs were denied and the dad did exactly as the mother said he would and murdered the children (3 children in one case and 1 child in another). I don't want to go to anymore funerals with tiny coffins.

While I feel for the OP, Maryland is the most difficult state in the nation I which to get a Final PO. So rant all you want about moving to another state. It is only easier to get a PO elsewhere.

As for gender bias on the bench, my experience is the opposite. I hate to generalize, but here goes: women judges tend to come down MUCH harder on women litigants. Same with female jurors in a rape or assault case.

Having said that, that doesn't mean that every woman judge is hard on every woman litigant. I'm just saying that the stereotype of "sisterhood" in the courtroom is BS.

And yes, people lie in court on both sides of the V. Supposed victims make up allegations and defendants (Respondants, they are called) also lie and engage in blaming the victim. But to claim that the whole PO system is rigged against Respondants is a vast over statement.

Anyway, that's my experience in trying these cases for the last dozen years or so.

daNattyFatty said:

So what do you propose for abuses, stalkings, harassments etc that don't happen when the court is in session? Good luck getting the court system to put a judge on duty for 24/7 coverage.

Click to expand...

I propose exactly that, "Night Court". It's not just a television show. There are any number of Public Defender's and Asst. State's Attorney's who would jump at the chance to become a Judge. It could be a natural stepping stone to day court. Other than that I think your question is a bit short sighted in the fact that the "victim" has already made his/her way out of the house to a Court Commissioner's office. They have escaped the danger for the moment. Is the danger going to increase any further by not getting the Protective Order until the next morning? I seriously doubt it. I am all for helping the "victim" find a safe place to stay overnight. I am all for helping them get transportation to court if need be to make their case before a Judge. The District Court Commissioner is a low level, low paid, easily manipulated individual in most cases. These facts alone show why they should not have the power to impact the rights and individual freedoms of another.

boundlessdyad said:

I propose exactly that, "Night Court". It's not just a television show. There are any number of Public Defender's and Asst. State's Attorney's who would jump at the chance to become a Judge. It could be a natural stepping stone to day court. Other than that I think your question is a bit short sighted in the fact that the "victim" has already made his/her way out of the house to a Court Commissioner's office. They have escaped the danger for the moment. Is the danger going to increase any further by not getting the Protective Order until the next morning? I seriously doubt it. I am all for helping the "victim" find a safe place to stay overnight. I am all for helping them get transportation to court if need be to make their case before a Judge. The District Court Commissioner is a low level, low paid, easily manipulated individual in most cases. These facts alone show why they should not have the power to impact the rights and individual freedoms of another.

Click to expand...

I know for a fact Night Court has been done in Baltimore County. They don't do it anymore and the judges were a big reason why it was axed. Trial dates are already into late June for new cases, so it's not like they care about that.

My question is not short sighted at all. I work in law enforcement and see these situations daily. I can without a doubt say that just because someone has temporarily escaped something doesn't mean all is magically well. Not always are people able to find a safe place right away. If they do, it's probably some place that the person they want protection from knows already (family or friend). Not always can someone afford to go away to a motel/hotel right away either. Shelters are overrun with homeless and the House of Ruth doesn't have a lot of resources.

Emergency relief is definitely needed for some people, and others, well they can wait til the next court session. I'll agree to that. But having a judge on duty 24/7 just isn't going to happen here.

fabsroman said:

I've seen both sides of this. I've seen where the woman was being vindictive and I have seen where the woman was being abused. I've seen where the woman being abused dropped the protective order because she was financially dependent on the man and then she got abused again.

The problem with domestics is that sometimes, the woman and even children end up getting killed. Plenty of cases where the judge was too lenient on the abuser and next thing you know, somebody is dead. Plenty of times where a judge has allowed a father to have unsupervised visitation that results in the death of children. Pretty sure I can google tons of horrific domestic violence articles. Googled "Cops killed in domestic violence matters" a couple weeks ago and the number of hits was astounding.

Judges are also not God. They have no idea what the heck is going on other than what evidence is being presented to them.

Domestic violence SUCKS. Thing is, how does society deal with it? Kind of like how does society deal with the poor?

Click to expand...

Easy. Due process. No middle of the night orders without a chance to defend yourself in court. It's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be.

If people were freely allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to arm and defend themselves, it would be much less of an issue. That 7 day wait (or 100+ days as it was for a time last year) for a handgun or the multi-month wait for a concealed carry license are THE cause of the problem for a spouse that is suffering abuse. The MD government causes people to be defenseless by violating rights (2nd Amendment, right to self defense/duty to retreat) and then their solution is more rights violations (total lack of due process based on nothing more than an accusation) for a problem that needn't even exist (defenseless abuse victims).

Government MUST always err on the side of letting the guilty go free in order to respect our rights. Bad things might sometimes happen, but that is and always will be the price of free society. I'll take freedom and occasional bad acts over a totalitarian state and guaranteed safety any day of week.

2AHokie said:

Easy. Due process. No middle of the night orders without a chance to defend yourself.

It's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be. If people were freely allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to arm and defend themselves, it would be much less of an issue. That 7 day wait for a handgun or the multi-month wait for a concealed carry license are THE cause. Government causes people to be defenseless by violating rights and then the solution is more rights violations (total lack of due process) for a problem that needn't even exist.

Government MUST always err on the side of letting the guilty go free in order to respect our rights. Bad things might sometimes happen, but that is and always will be the price of free society.

Click to expand...

With a protective order, nobody is getting locked up. The Respondent is free to go. The Respondent just cannot have access to firearms or be in the vicinity of the Petitioner. Emergency restraining orders are usually granted without the Respondent being present. Then, a hearing is usually scheduled in a week where both sides can put on their evidence for a Temporary Restraining Order for a set length of time. I see zero issue with ordering a person to stay away from another person if there is any chance of domestic violence. The only issue I see is where the firearms can be stored during the time frame that a protective order is in place. I would also have to look at whether a prior protective order prohibits a person from owning firearms, but off the top of my head I believe it is only a current protective order that does so.

End of the day, a protective order really is for the children. Just crazy to think that things like this are actually necessary in life, or that a father would kill children to get back at a significant other. Also sick to think that a woman would throw a significant other under the bus and ask for a protective order when there is no reason for one.

daNattyFatty said:

I know for a fact Night Court has been done in Baltimore County. They don't do it anymore and the judges were a big reason why it was axed. Trial dates are already into late June for new cases, so it's not like they care about that.

My question is not short sighted at all. I work in law enforcement and see these situations daily. I can without a doubt say that just because someone has temporarily escaped something doesn't mean all is magically well. Not always are people able to find a safe place right away. If they do, it's probably some place that the person they want protection from knows already (family or friend). Not always can someone afford to go away to a motel/hotel right away either. Shelters are overrun with homeless and the House of Ruth doesn't have a lot of resources.

Emergency relief is definitely needed for some people, and others, well they can wait til the next court session. I'll agree to that. But having a judge on duty 24/7 just isn't going to happen here.

Click to expand...

We aren't talking about criminal trials, we are talking about bogus Protective Orders. If it didn't work because of Judges in the past it was because existing Judges were used. My proposal is for a night court to be a stepping stone. A "real" judge but one that handles night cases and would also be available to issue warrants, etc. in the interest of Law Enforcement. As vacancies open up they may get "promoted" to day court. In any event the next morning is NOT too long to wait for a "victim" who has already gotten out of the house. There is no months long delay in Judges hearing Protective Order cases.

2AHokie said:

Easy. Due process. No middle of the night orders without a chance to defend yourself.

It's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be. If people were freely allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to arm and defend themselves, it would be much less of an issue. That 7 day wait (or 100+ days as it was for a time last year) for a handgun or the multi-month wait for a concealed carry license are THE cause of the problem. The MD government causes people to be defenseless by violating rights (2nd Amendment, right to self defense) and then the solution is more rights violations (total lack of due process based on nothing more than an accusation) for a problem that needn't even exist.

Government MUST always err on the side of letting the guilty go free in order to respect our rights. Bad things might sometimes happen, but that is and always will be the price of free society. I'll take freedom and occasional bad acts over a totalitarian state and guaranteed safety any day of week.

Click to expand...

fabsroman said:

With a protective order, nobody is getting locked up. The Respondent is free to go. The Respondent just cannot have access to firearms or be in the vicinity of the Petitioner. Emergency restraining orders are usually granted without the Respondent being present. Then, a hearing is usually scheduled in a week where both sides can put on their evidence for a Temporary Restraining Order for a set length of time. I see zero issue with ordering a person to stay away from another person if there is any chance of domestic violence. The only issue I see is where the firearms can be stored during the time frame that a protective order is in place. I would also have to look at whether a prior protective order prohibits a person from owning firearms, but off the top of my head I believe it is only a current protective order that does so.

End of the day, a protective order really is for the children. Just crazy to think that things like this are actually necessary in life, or that a father would kill children to get back at a significant other. Also sick to think that a woman would throw a significant other under the bus and ask for a protective order when there is no reason for one.

Click to expand...

The emergency restraining order should be issued by a Judge who can determine whether a "victim" is speaking the truth or not. Many bogus "victims" wouldn't even file if they knew an experienced Judge was going to hear the initial petition. Firearms are typically turned over to a Law Enforcement Agency for safekeeping during a Protective Order. There is no ban on firearms ownership for someone who "once" had a Protective Order issued against them, only for when it is active.

District Court Commissioners don't have the intellect, experience, education, or in most cases even the willingness to determine if someone is speaking the truth or not. These individuals should not be able to even temporarily restrict the rights of citizens where no probable cause for arrest exists.