Jurisdiction/enforcement of protective orders

[gemneye73]

State: Georgia

A couple goes to Florida on vacation. There was a fight. End result, man receives probation for 12 months etc etc and is to have no contact with the woman.

He then files, in the state of Georgia citing the anti-stalking law... a temporary protective order and fabricated reasons to be "in fear".

She goes out one weekend and arrives at an establishment early. The man shows up, she informs the security gaurd who then asks him to leave and she also calls the police. However, the man goes to the manager of the restaurant who happens to be a friend of his...the manager also calls the police. The manager tells the woman to leave, that he can stay, "because he is a friend".

She leaves, police arrive and gives her a warning of criminal trespass.
She had a copy of the paperwork from the district attorneys office and the probation papers.

The police claim that she was in violation of the Georgia protective order, because she had called police and that they have to follow through with the manager's wishes because it is a "private" establishment and that orders are not in effect on private property. (???)Hence the warning....

1) Did she do the right thing by calling the police immediately since the Florida order states that he is to make no contact?

2) Why didn't the police enforce the original order?

3) Shouldn't the state of Georgia ask someone who is filing a temp. protective order if an existing order already exists?

Thank you!

[socrateaser]

>1) Did she do the right thing by calling the police
>immediately since the Florida order states that he is to make
>no contact?

I don't know. I need to read the exact text of the FL order.

>
>2) Why didn't the police enforce the original order?

See #1.

>
>3) Shouldn't the state of Georgia ask someone who is filing a
>temp. protective order if an existing order already exists?

Nope. The grounds for the type of order that was apparently made against you is a showing of actual or threatened physical or emotional harm. If the plaintiff alleged this and you never challenge the subsequent order, by appearing at a hearing and offering your proof to the contrary, then the order is maintained as valid and enforceable and you are thus subject to its prohibition.

The court is not required to consider the existence of any other similar order.

[gemneye73]

The exact text simply states:

"No contact with victim." It doesn't state under what condition it was okay etc, simply no contact, it doesn't differentiate between public or private property.

Along with 12 months probation, pyschiatric treatment, lawful employment etc.

3) On the temporary protective order for Georgia, it states that he was in fear of his life because she tried to engage in a conversation with "members of his party" which she was unaware that the individuals came with him. There hasn't been a hearing yet on the TPO, but she plans to challenge it. She also has record that he was trying to contact her prior to him filing an order against her...she has not returned phone calls etc and feels that this is simply retaliation because of the first incident.

[socrateaser]

>The exact text simply states:
>
>"No contact with victim." It doesn't state under what
>condition it was okay etc, simply no contact, it doesn't
>differentiate between public or private property.
>
>Along with 12 months probation, pyschiatric treatment, lawful
>employment etc.

Well, if the FL order does not state how it will be enforced for a violation, then this is a civil no contact order that is not enforceable by arrest, but only via a motion'petition for contempt, therefore, law enforcement cannot independently act under its conditions.

The GA order, on the other hand, as I mentioned, is enforceable via law enforcement arrest, so, bottom line, everything happend in the bar exactly according to law -- at least, based on your posted facts.

[gemneye73]

I somewhat understand the logic, but what I don't understand is how the victim in one state becomes the "criminal" in the new state.


I do understand the differences that you explained however, she called the police because the assistant d.a's office advised her to do so in the event he came into contact with her....

She did and also because as soon as she knew he was present, she wanted to make sure that she was not accused of violating the GA temporary since the hearing is still a week away. She did leave immediately with no arguement. The probation office is filing contempt and supposedly issuing a warrant.

Under the Georgia stalking law, an order is enforceable whether its in a public or private place and the officer told her differently.

Last question:
Regardless of who filed the Georgia order, isn't it the responsibility of both parties to stay away from each other? He is still attempting to contact her now and she doesn't even want to bother contacting the police.

(thanks for your help!)

[socrateaser]

>Regardless of who filed the Georgia order, isn't it the
>responsibility of both parties to stay away from each other?
>He is still attempting to contact her now and she doesn't even
>want to bother contacting the police.

Under the GA order, it is the respondent's (i.e., woman's) responsibility to stay away from the petitioner.

Under the FL order, and based on your previously-stated facts, which do not disclose the EXACT text of the FL orders for my review, you stated that the man was ordered to have no contact with the woman. Such an order is not self-enforcing, as is the case with the GA order, because it does not specifically direct law enforcement authorities to arrest anyone if they are determined to be in violation.

Therefore, it is necessary for someone to prefer contempt charges against the man, and then try him on the charge, that he willfully and knowingly violated a valid and enforceable court order. Willfulness in this context generally means that the contact was intended and with knowing disregard for the order.

There are a lot of gotchas associated with civil vs. criminal contempt violations, especially across state lines. Certain court orders, such as the GA order you describe, have the benefit of being created under a uniform federal scheme that permits simple enforcement as a criminal violation, beyond state bondaries. Ordinary civil court orders, even "no contact" orders, cannot easily be enforced, as law enforcement agencies are not able to arrest someone unless they are charged with a crime.

So, you have a chicken and egg problem, i.e., you want an arrest, but you need a contempt conviction first, and you can't get the contempt conviction unless you arrest.

My point is that the FL order APPEARS to lack sufficient specificity to permit an arrest in GA. I say "appears" as I have never read the order in its totality.

[gemneye73]

No wonder it takes 4 years of law school to understand this stuff.

Thank you!