Over here at least, a RO gives the cops a reason to arrest a potential aggressor and defusing possibly violent situation. The restrainee does not have to be present in court and a letter to his last known address is sufficient.
They can also be used to stop someone from destroying evidence etc.
Bully to that! Bully, I say!
That’s a good question. It seems that most restraining orders are typically set up to prohibit the restrainee from coming within X feet of the other party, but are there jurisdictions that permit in theory, or that actually use other restraints? E.g. can a judge issue a civil restraining order requiring a person to put a sign on his car saying “Warning: Potentially dangerous civil restrainee - report suspicious behavior to Podunk Police 555-1111”? Could a judge make a civil restrainee use filtered Internet only (e.g. to prevent them from going to WikiStalker Dot Com or viewing Google image search results on the other party’s name)? Could a judge bar the restrainee from wearing certain types of clothing (no “stalker” hats for you)?
An RO can do just about anything to prevent harm. See the list here about what restraining orders do. The last item is The judge has the power under the law to order anything else that will help to protect you, as long as you agree to it. That’s a very general statement from about.com but it’s probably pretty accurate.
I guess it depends on what this thread is about. The restraining orders to prevent violence are the most common form of restraining orders, and I think that’s all we’re talking about here, but the term “restraining order” doesn’t have to be related to violence or stalking. Restraining orders are a form of injunction used throughout the law. They are meant to “restrain” someone, keep them from doing something, that would bring harm to someone. That harm could be financial, harm to someone’s reputation, etc. Here is a site with an example of a regular non violence related restraining order regarding a vehicle sale. Here is an article about one company getting a restraining order on another.
So, a judge probably could specify the hat a person wears in a stalking case if it somehow did prevent harm. It’s a little unlikely in that case, but a restraining order in another case might be all about hats. It could keep your business partner from wearing his favorite hat with a racist slogan on TV, for example.
If you are accused of a crime that is a separate matter. Restraining orders are civil not criminal. The defendant is not accused of a crime in the civil proceedings. And there is a different burden of proof.
Thank you. That’s what I was really after. A judge has pretty wide discretion, then.
Although it’s a civil issue getting an RO against someone, if the Orderee violates the RO, isn’t that then a criminal matter?
I got a lot of amusement watching via the interwebs this woman who was on a campaign of bothering and harassing an ex and her outrage that the courts would dare to admonish her after she’d violate the restraining orders against her and then post brags and photos on her twitter account boasting about what she had done. I mean, how DARE her Probation Officer read her private twitter account that was posted there on the internet for anyone to see? Anyway, at some points (this happened more than once, IIRC), the police had to cuff her and haul her in to cool off until court was in session so the judge could extend the RO and scold her. She managed to make a 6 month RO stretch out to at least 3 years, maybe longer.