A criminal order of protection is typically issued automatically after a domestic violence arrest. But according to the Domestic Shelters website, several abusers brazenly violate the orders time and time again.
The restraining orders are very similar to civil injunctions restraining one party from harassment, threats, or any sort of interference. It is an order from a court providing security to the party requesting it.
The violation of a temporary restraining order may subject a person to arrest, criminal charges, fines, or even incarceration, depending on how the order was breached and applicable state laws.
There are many possible defenses an attorney offers in case there are allegations of a restraining order violation. Let’s find out how a capable lawyer may help his or her client defend in these instances.
Image Source
Lack of Knowledge of the Order
If you receive a restraining order, a very good defense is that you do not know of it. If you really did not receive that order or even its terms, then it strengthens your case. Most of the courts require proper notifications to individuals regarding court orders, so if you prove that you were actually not informed, then you will definitely escape the penalties.
It is good to have more evidence in support of your claim. Therefore, this can be used to explain the circumstances and context surrounding your particular case.
Ambiguity in the Restraining Order
Ambiguity in the restraining order is a strong defense if the terms are unclear or vague at all. If there is a possibility of charging for a violation, you should look at the restraining order very closely.
Were those restrictions clear enough for you to know? If not, you might argue that you genuinely didn’t know you were violating the order. Arguments in the court can be handled by a qualified defense lawyer. According to criminal defense lawyer Jeffery L. Greco, a lawyer can also cross-examine witnesses and present evidence, aside from making arguments in court. Vagueness in a restraining order can show that it’s unreasonable to expect compliance.
If the wording of the order also allows for interpretation, it weakens the case against you. In that regard, you will be able to construct quite a strong case on which to base that no intentional violation of the order took place.
First Amendment Protections
Restraining orders are designed as protective measures for people, yet they sometimes even violate First Amendment freedoms by restricting free communication or expression.
You probably feel that your ability to communicate or express yourself is improperly restrained when a restraining order violation is handed out to you. If your acts or words do not cause a direct danger of abuse, you may be able to prove that the restraining order goes too far.
A person’s right to communicate thoughts rests in the protection and development of the community, in which everyone feels like contributing. Balance requires safety against freedom of expression.
Consent or Mutual Agreement
When both are in agreement concerning certain matters, it can serve as a powerful foundation against a restraining order.
If you and the other person never debated or consented to any contact arrangement or specific usage, it would demonstrate that there was no intention to violate the order. This agreement can demonstrate that both of you are willing participants, which can significantly impact the case.
Agreements should be well-documented and explicitly stated to fortify your position. Maintaining open communication and setting boundaries together solidifies your defense and also creates belonging and a sense of community. Mutually accepted terms can lighten up complicated situations and lead to a much easier resolution.
Inadequate Evidence of Violation
Evidence is what the law depends upon, and restraining order proceedings are no different.
You will begin evaluating the validity of the evidence against you since you are charged with a violation.
The case against you can be dismissed if no reasonable evidence can be brought forth. You could assert that the alleged action is completely denied or at least argue that it may be a case of circumstantial evidence.
If there are any inconsistencies between the witness testimonies and opposed to the other party, their testimonies end up being considered unreliable or questionable. Confronting evidence does two things: first, it protects your rights; second, it bolsters your case.
A sound defense should always be based on a solid footing. Strong evidence would lead to a favorable verdict.
*Disclaimer – This is a collaborative post. This post has been pre-written.
