Woman Granted Court Order Against Cusack

Submitted by bull on Sat, 2006-07-22 18:17

After Cusack got a retraining order on his female stalker, she requested a restraining order against him. The court obliged her pending a hearing in August even though she is the predator. We only hear about cases like this when a celebrity is targeted. Makes me wonder how many female whack-jobs are awarded retraining orders against their prey? Story here.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Why would a judge bother to give her a restraining order? There already is one.

It seems to me that who took out the restraining order in the first place is irrelivant, as it leads to the same end either way - they can't go near eachother - or at least that's how it should be.

People who take out restraining orders and then stalk the person they have a restraining order against for the purposes of causing that person to be in violation of the order should be prosecuted. that would ensure that the original meaning of the order (protection of one person from another) is maintained.

Of course, it is completely redundant to say this here - as everyone who reads these post already knows this - but I'll restate the obvious anyway. Restraining orders whould never be given out on world alone with absolutely no evidence of any kind to back them up. This is a MAJOR problem with the current scheme of things and needs to be changed immidiately. Prove it or no order of protection. Not need to have a full fledged trail, but if there really is some sort of abuse or intimidation going on there is also some sort of evidence to support that. Record phone calls, get a co-worker who has witnessed it, get a medical examiners report, save e-mails, whatever it takes, just don't show up empty handed and expect a judge to grant your every whim when it comes to restraining orders (or for that matter any kind of court order).

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Paragon on Sun, 2006-07-23 16:00

Restraining orders ... also known as Orders of Protection, have become almost universal in divorce and DV cases.

Judges fear being persecuted by feminist women's advocacy groups if they refuse to issue these often bogus R.O.s.

Lawyers understand that they can be sued for negligence if they fail to advise a female client of the strategic advantage of filing a false Order of Protection.

As every man knows, no matter what his lovely cupcake/soulmate/girrrrlfriend/wife
says ... "I luv you honey...."

He's one 911 phone call away from losing everything.

Committed men, sleep well, with your potential enemy.

Contesting your servitude could be disasterous!

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Roy on Sun, 2006-07-23 18:28

"Lawyers understand that they can be sued for negligence if they fail to advise a female client of the strategic advantage of filing a false Order of Protection."

Are you kidding?? Can they really be sued for this? Oh well, one more reason not to be a lawyer.

-Axolotl (formerly 'quetzal')

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Mon, 2006-07-24 23:53