The last post addressed the case of a mom who’s been accused of serial rape by the father of one of her children.
Ignore whether it’s okay to allow a man’s record to be contaminated with an uncorroborated allegation of rape scrawled on a restraining order application—an allegation, incidentally, that will ruin his life (there’s not an employer on the face of the planet who’s going to respond to “She accused me of rape” with “Oh, fiddlesticks. When can you start?”).
Ignore that and consider what judge, in the “bad old days” before restraining orders existed, would have allowed a woman to be publicly labeled a rapist, merely by implication.
Now consider how far back in history we’d have to reach to find a time when such an unfounded allegation would previously have been taken seriously. I’m not a historian, but my guess would be during the period when we last had witch trials.
It was probably possible, say, as recently as the 1600s to have a woman tried as a succubus (a demon in female form who forcibly copulated with men while they slept) just based on “persuasive” testimony like “She consorts with the devil!”
Our modern-day witch trials, restraining order adjudications, which proceed from the same non-evidentiary basis, don’t threaten penalties like drowning or incineration. I wonder, though, whether their draconian punishments were the only aspects of the original witch trials that were unjust.
Copyright © 2014 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com
Rhonda
February 10, 2014
I’m I so glad to discover your website. My husband filed a RO on me a year an half ago. We were married 23 years. I had to fire one attorney she lied to me about the RO and totally play on my fears. Then tried to strong arm me into signing divorce paper for only 600 a week for only 7 years. My husband an I have over a million in assents.He has cut me off from any money at all. Thank god for my sister or I be homeless. Just hired a good honest attorney. I still haven’t had my day in court. My husband attorney keeps postponing the court date. 7 months ago they filed for a two day trail to prove my husband had know choice but to throw me out because he was in fear of his life. So if he wins I get nothing because I caused the divorce, he had no choice. OMG I’ve been throw on the street like a dog an except to run in fear. Thank god this year away from him I’ve been able to heal an claim back the powerful women I was before I married him. He better watch what he says because he really thought I was a weak fearful women. Wait till he sees me after all this time. He will see i have no fear of him anymore. I have found by educating myself I empower myself. Education is power. Thanks u so much for educating me to see the real truth how a life could be destroyed so easily. I mean that I felt so confuse cut off an alone. With your site I have hope an knowledge. I’m soooooo grateful. My chrildren thank u too
Rhonda
LikeLike
Moderator
February 11, 2014
I’m really glad if something I’ve said helps you, Rhonda. Give this a look when you have a chance: “Divorce and High-Conflict People: Borderlines, Narcissists, Histrionics, Sociopaths and Other Persuasive Blamers.”
LikeLike
Anonymous123
February 10, 2014
Again, I’ve considered that the restraining order process is a form of domestic terrorism. The judges are acting as criminals and defrauding people. It’s a form of felony fraud, for which judges are often not criminally prosecuted. With no evidence of the actus reus, there should be little reason for the judges to allow the ex parte restraining order. When a judge recognizes that there is no evidence of an act, yet acts are alleged, a skeptical judge might pass it through hoping that some greater Truth exists to all of what is involved than what was observed during the ex parte hearing. However, I do not know why such a skeptic would be a judge in the first place, as one might hope that a good and honest skeptic would not be a judge in the first place…. I believe that judges are corrupt philosophers: I cannot get around that idea. The legal system sounds great in theory, but the technology to support its motives is not there; thus, it’s currently fraudulent.
The David Letterman restraining order is one of the most classically fraudulent restraining orders that occurred. Imagine what would have happened if David Letterman admitted to having psychic powers? The pandemonium! OMG! How many people would have believed that load of bullshit? Gullible people at that. Actually, it makes me wonder if he would have been thrown in jail in contempt of court for alleging that he had psychic powers.
I knew this woman he studied witches and the sort. If I recall correctly, the last Witch trial was sometime in the 1950s. It involved a woman being perceptive about government affairs, for which it was alleged that she was a witch and tried as a witch. Actually, it was the 1940s: The woman’s name was Helen Duncan. Well, it appears she was arrested in the 1950s for something, so make what you will of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Duncan
LikeLike
Moderator
February 11, 2014
I think you’re right (not least of all about restraining orders being domestic terrorism). My impression of the judges I’ve known—with one exception—is that they would have readily been judges during the time of the Inquisition. They’re the same guys, only with less latitude and subject to different social and professional cues and expectations. I might go you one better and call them corrupt pontiffs.
The first judge I ever stood before actually halted the proceedings to hold forth on decorousness (he was lecturing the plaintiff’s husband) and pronounced: “I consider my courtroom the last bastion of civilization!” You seriously can’t make this stuff up. Likening judges to minor potentates or feudal lords holding sway over their fiefdoms really isn’t overstatement.
If only that restraining order had been served on Steven Colbert! He probably would have mocked the proceeding (to expose its own mockery). I can even imagine him entering the courtroom straight-faced in a tie and turban.
Assuming the “latter-day enchantress” wasn’t prosecuted as a lamia or practitioner of necromancy, I think my basic case stands. The feminist hoax is that social justice has been advanced under feminists’ direction. They’re like the smart protagonists in Orwell’s Animal Farm, though, who end up becoming the enemy they opposed. Feminism is the new patriarchy (what true feminists like Camille Paglia and Christina Hoff Sommers call “the feminist establishment”). Social justice since the 70s has hung a U-turn, which is interesting in light of your other observations, because the (radical) feminist thrust is basically punitive—negative reinforcement—which only alienates and arouses the resentment of the men they purport to want to enlighten.
LikeLike