Originally Posted by CJ7
The horse's-ass keeps making noise .... trying to look intellectual. Like:
"How about you explain to us, Olivia, the difference between an automatic restraining order (that you're referring to) and a domestic violence restraining order (that's relevant in this discussion)."
I even gave him a link to a New York (Buffalo you know?) article posted talking about auto- TROs .... and in New York (Buffalo you know?) its called an "order of protection" when involving intimate type relationships ... not a "domestic violence temporary restraining order" as he has stated ... and the TRO is based on an "ex parte" presentation to the judge, which means that the other side was not present to oppose what was
alleged.
A mutual order is often the result of either mutual combat OR mutual agreement to avoid a he said/she said pissing contest in the public forum ...
I think the "proof of the pudding" is in the CHL issued to Zimmerman. I'd have to look at Florida, but I think most, if not all states, pull the CHL (or prohibit its issue) if the applicant/holder has a domestic violence finding in his history ... and that doesn't mean a conviction .. it can mean the issuance of a "protective order" (civil action) based on a finding by the Court that domestic violence was committed, and is likely to be committed in the future.
Here's what Texas says quoted:
"is not currently restricted under a court protective order or subject to a restraining order affecting the spousal relationship, other than a restraining order solely affecting property interests.."
Florida: not sure if from actual statutory wording, but on "qualification" information poste by gov.... :
"If you have been issued an injunction that is currently in force that restrains you from committing acts of domestic violence or acts of repeat violence, you will be disqualified from eligibility until that injunction is no longer in force."
Federal law prohibiting possession of weapon and ammunition:
18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(32). The (protective*) order must also contain a finding that the person presents a credible threat to the victim and must restrain him or her from certain specified conduct. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). Most state laws require these elements for the issuance of a protective order. [
↩]
*Added by LL for clarification"
18 U.S. § 922
"(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and
(B)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence."
