Recent Posts in Restraining Orders Category

Just when divorce attorneys in Pasadena thought they might get their wish that nasty, high-profile celebrity divorces would be a thing of the past, the divorce of Oscar-nominated actor Terrence Howard comes along to prove us wrong. According to the Daily Beast, newly-released court documents in Howard's divorce case are filled with he said/she said allegations of "violence, death threats, extortion and racial slurs." And that's just the beginning.

Terrence Howard and Michelle Ghent were engaged in May 2009 but didn't walk down the aisle until January 27, 2010 and, according to the paperwork which was filed last year, problems for the pair started long before they said "I do." Michelle Ghent Howard claims that her estranged husband threatens to physically harm her via text, voice mail, email and Skype at all hours of the day. Terrence Howard says that it's Michelle who does the harassing and he claims that Michelle has threatened to ruin his career by releasing recordings of conversations he had with other people. Michelle was granted a restraining order on December 5th based on claims that "Terrence Howard has caused her physical injuries that required medical attention, once broke her computer in half, repeatedly threatened her and stalked her by telephone and on the Internet," reports the Daily Beast.

Howard now has filed a restraining order against Michelle and is due in court on January 17th. The documents say that Michelle did not know about Howard's 2002 domestic violence charges from the past wherein he pleaded guilty to attacking his first wife in Pennsylvania. He says Ghent Howard was also physically abusive, she had a history of hitting him in public when he was friendly to female fans and that she repeatedly called him the "N word" and other racially-charged insults. The court documents are stuffed with more scandals like alleged email hacking, bank account draining and more bizarre physical altercations.

Michelle's restraining order against Terrence Howard expires on January 17th, which is coincidentally the same day a judge will decide whether or not he will grant Terrence Howard's request for a restraining order against Michelle.

Look at your current relationship and note whether or not any or all of the following apply:

• Is possessive or jealous toward you.
• Bossy or demanding in attempts to control you.
• May have a quick temper and/or is violent.
• Attempts to isolate you by cutting you off from friends, family, and other social contacts.
• Abuses alcohol and/or drugs.
• You feel pressure sexually and/or demands sexual activities you're not comfortable with.
• Tells you you're responsible when he mistreats you.
• History of bad relationships.
• Friends and family are concerned for your health and safety.
• You worry about your partner's reactions to what you say and do.
• Partner makes "jokes" that embarrass, humiliate, or shame you privately or around family and friends.
• Partner has angry outbursts when they feel hurt, shame, fear, or loss of control.
• Partner witnessed abusive parental relationship and/or was abused as a child.
• In order to cope with the pain of the relationship, you and/or your partner have developed or progressed in alcohol or drug dependence.
• You repeatedly leave and return to relationship against the advice of your loved ones.
• You are not able to leave the relationship even though you know it is in your best interests to do so.

If you are thinking about leaving a destructive disturbing or otherwise unworkable relationship know you'll most likely always struggle with claiming a sense of self while with this person. It will zap you of your energy and for all your effort you'll still feel a sense of loss and emptiness. If your partner agrees to couples therapy and both of you are sincerely interested in making positive changes then go for it.

Just be prepared that it might not work and in the end you'll need to get out so you can begin living a normal life.

Remember to expect respect. It takes practice, and trust in yourself, to know when something someone says to you, or wants you to do, isn't right. Stand up for yourself and realize you have great value. Don't let other people push you around, embarrass, or in some other way make you feel inferior. People who are cruel to you are not worth having in your life.

Above all, don't be so dependent on another person, that the value you place on yourself is determined by the attention they pay to you. You are a separate person!

If you are a party to a family law case involving a request for a restraining order in the County of Orange, you need to be aware of the peculiar orders that are made against people accused of committing domestic violence.  Family law litigants who are accused of committing domestic violence within the County of Orange are ordered by the court to meet with a government investigator and answer questions regarding the accusations made by the opposing party.  The interview takes place prior to the hearing for the issuance of a permanent restraining order.

These peculiar orders are served on the accused party after the temporary restraining order is issued (sometimes the accused party is not given notice of the hearing).  The accused party is ordered to report to the investigator's office at a specified time and date, and is not invited to bring his or her attorney to the interview.  Prior to attending the appointment with the investigator, the accused party is ordered to complete a packet of documents, which includes a detailed questionnaire concerning the other party's allegations.  When the accused party arrives at the investigator's office, the investigator engages him or her in a question and answer session.  At the conclusion of the interview, the court investigator prepares a report, which is forwarded to the judge for review prior to the hearing.  If a party refuses to speak with the investigator by invoking the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, his or her chances of defending against the allegations are most likely doomed.  This is simply because many judges in Orange County use the party's refusal to speak to the investigator as an admission and place limits on how he or she can proceed with the evidentiary hearing (the Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination does not apply to Family Law Domestic Violence cases).

In my opinion, there are several problems with this procedure.  From an attorney's point of view, we always have to consider the possibility that any and all statements made by a client to the court's investigator will find its way to the local police and prosecutor.  When a party speaks to the court's investigator, he or she is not granted immunity, and therefore anything he or she says can and will be used against him or her in a criminal court of law.  Due to the fact that the process of obtaining a Permanent Restraining order in Family Court is an expedited procedure, an attorney representing a person accused of committing domestic violence in family court usually does not know the extent of the evidence, and has not had ample opportunity to adequately investigate the case prior to advising the client whether or not to speak to the investigator.  On one hand, the attorney is reluctant to place a client in a situation where the client might make incriminating statements and as a result could face criminal charges.  Anyone who has handled these types of cases is familiar with the fact that many of them are a classic "he said, she said" type of a case.  Frequently, the only thing that the criminal prosecutor has to corroborate an accusation is a statement made by the accused.  Consequently, the attorney who advises his client to speak to a court investigator is taking a great risk which can result in severe consequences.  Thus, in the abundance of caution, the attorney is usually going to advise his or her client to not answer any questions.   

On the other hand, the attorney is reluctant to give advice to the client that can be severely detrimental to the his or her chances of defeating a Domestic Violence Restraining Order and having a fair hearing on important Family Law issues such as child custody and spousal support.  Unfortunately, the Orange County court system ignores the fact that there can be harsh consequences associated with the issuance of a Domestic Violence Restraining Order in Family Court.  A person bound by a restraining order is normally going to have difficulty in obtaining certain types of jobs, will not be allowed to possess a firearm, and will be stigmatized by many people who will consider him or her a perpetrator of domestic violence, regardless of the fact that the accused may not have committed such a crime.       

Furthermore, the outcome of a request for a Domestic Violence Restraining Order can be highly influenced by the investigation or the pre-existing biases of the investigator assigned to the case.  What happens when the investigator does not have the time, resources, or the ability to conduct a proper investigation?   What happens when the investigator has a bias or prejudice against the accused?  Well, obviously the accused is not going to get a fair hearing because we all know that an investigator can slant the facts against the accused pretty easily.  And what happens when the judge is the type who rubber stamps the investigator's report and follows the recommendations made by the investigator?  Obviously, in these cases the accused is being deprived of a fair hearing because the judge has been unfairly biased prior to any evidence being presented in a court of law.

In light of the recent changes in family law that favor evidentiary hearings (i.e., Family Code Section 217 which directs courts to allow evidentiary hearings), Orange County is missing the boat by continuing on with this procedure, which seems to have been created as sort of a triage system.  As a family law attorney, I can say without a doubt that many restraining orders are obtained by people who are making false accusations, and using the restraining order process as a means to obtain an advantage on important issues such as child custody, visitation, and spousal support.  A victim of domestic violence can also obtain a larger share of the community property by filing suit against the alleged perpetrator.  Consequently, there are a lot of strategic reasons as to why family law litigants are motivated to file requests for restraining orders without basis for any actual domestic violence.  Unfortunately, the Orange County system, which stacks the deck in favor of the accusing party, only adds to the problem. 

Unfortunately, family attorneys in Pasadena have seen divorcing couples engage in verbal battles and dramatic fights long after they've moved away from one another. This week, country singer Sara Evans fought back against her ex-husband Craig Schelske, who'd spilled the beans about their marriage on Anderson Cooper's talk show this week. She wants him to zip his lip while he contends she's violating his First Amendment rights.

Schelske sat down with Cooper with Judge Jeanine Pirro on September 20 to tell his side of the story. Schelske says he was ordered by his famous wife's lawyers to keep his mouth shut and therefore couldn't defend himself against the now-famous infidelity and porn addiction allegations. Pirro defended Schelske by saying, "Craig could not say whether or not he done the things Sarah's lawyers had accused him of. I'll say it for him, the answer is no. He's precluded by a confidentially agreement and you don't get a judgment for slander against attorneys unless what they said was wrong." Schelske told Cooper he lost custody of his three children because of the allegations.

Team Evans was not pleased with the interview, even though Schelske actually said very little about Evans and the details of their relationship. Evans filed for a second restrain order on September 21, the day after the interview, to ban her ex-husband from making any further statements about their divorce. The singer claims her children were harmed by the contents of the interview with Cooper. A judge agreed with Evans and granted her a restarting order against Schelske the same day.

Schelske and Evans married in 1993 and divorced in 2007. At the time of their divorce, both parties signed a confidentiality agreement to prevent either person from talking about their divorce and subsequent custody battle. Evans is currently married to retired football star Jay Barker and lives with him and their combined clan of seven children in Birmingham, Ala.

If your partner is emotionally abusive to you, he may:

• refuse to acknowledge the value or self-worth of others;
• not listen;
• humiliate others;
• ignore logic;
• not take responsibility for hurting others;
• be jealous and possessive;
• often see himself as a martyr or victim; and
• make you feel guilty for no reason.

This type of behavior by your partner can leave you feeling out of control, weak, and/or humiliated. You may feel like you have to walk on egg shells to avoid confrontation and try to have to anticipate his moods and in order to keep the relationship at peace. You may also feel pressured into having sex and confused as to where you stand in the relationship. Basically, you may feel as though you are on a roller-coaster ride of good and bad times, and often you may even feel afraid and isolated from others. Emotional abuse usually happens slowly as a relationship progresses until one day you realize what's happening and have to deal with it.

One single mother told me that while contemplating a divorce from her verbally abusive husband, her friends (at the time) told her she was crazy. They would say, "you're gonna give up that nice vehicle... you won't be able to have a house on your own." She said that she realized that her number-one responsibility was to raise her son well and "everything else was secondary." She said that today, although they live in a small apartment and she struggles with a busy schedule, she has a great job, good friends, and is much happier than before. She says, "I had to go it alone. It's so much more important that [my son] sees me happy and that I teach him that material things don't matter as much." As you can see in this example, as hard as we try to improve our awareness and self-image, when you love someone, it's easy to be blind to the existence and effects of emotional abuse.

It is important to remember that emotional abuse can also be traumatizing. When something bad happens to you, if you can't resolve it in your mind or convey its intensity to others in order to get help, it probably caused you some sort of emotional damage. Emotional abuse is also harmful to a woman's self-esteem. According to the website Thisisawar.com (an educational resource which helps people deal with illness, grief, pregnancy, debt, and other personal issues), emotional abuse can have "serious physical and psychological consequences for women, including severe depression, anxiety, persistent headaches, back and stomach problems." Other symptoms include panic attacks, irritability, emotional numbness, eating irregularities, and insomnia. So how can you determine how much damage was done to you, and how can you fix it?

Scientists now have the technology to examine the brain and read the damage caused by emotional abuse through brain scans. According to recent research, these scans reveal such a trauma actually "changes the structure and function of the brain, at the point where the frontal cortex, the emotional brain and the survival brain converge." One of their major findings was that scans of people who had experienced emotional abuse were similar in "structural and functional irregularities" to people diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

If you feel you are or have been a victim of emotional abuse, there is help. First, if possible, remove yourself from the abusive situation. If you can't, then you should surround yourself with a network of people -- family and friends -- who can help you cope in such an unhealthy and often dangerous situation. You should also talk to a professional who will know how to help you through analysis and counseling. Under these circumstances, a professional will help you decide the best course of action for you. Couples therapy may be an answer or you may discover that it's time for you to leave.

This brings up an interesting point. It's very difficult for a lot of women to move on. I know several women who have stayed for years with partners who were abusive, neglectful, and unfaithful. Women who say they can't leave (besides having very low self-images) usually have long-standing erroneous beliefs that keep them tied to these undeserving men. Some of these women believe that they cannot abandon their dysfunctional partners; that these men somehow need them in order to survive. Oh, really? If those men really needed them, they would fear losing them and smarten up! Some women tell themselves that their partners will change and eventually recognize their value and love. Wrong. That outlook puts off happiness and fulfillment until "someday", which is when exactly? And deep down, do they believe it will ever really happen with this man? Other women believe that they will never find another man to love them so they stay with their abusers even though they are extremely unhappy. Why? Classic low self-esteem -- even if this were true, I believe that a woman can be alone and happy (I was), which is far better than feeling miserable sharing your life with a sadistic man! Don't make these mistakes. Acknowledge your value as a person who deserves love and respect. Recognize when something is really over.

One important thing to keep in mind is that the people in your life whom you love should make your life easier and add to your joy, not take away from it. Ask yourself: are you more often upset and confused than you are peaceful and happy? If so, then something is not right, and you should remedy the situation. If world events of the last few years have taught us anything, it's not to waste a moment of life. Do what it takes to make yourself happy. Above all, be true to yourself. If you follow your heart, and you love honestly and openly, you will at the very least know that you gave your all and will have no regrets.

This article has been edited and excerpted from Boot Camp for the Broken-Hearted (New Horizon Press, 2008) by Audrey Valieriani. Based in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, Valeriani is the creator of TheAccidentalExpert.com, which provides relationship coaching.

A client’s safety is something thatdivorce attorneys in Pasadena take very seriously. In cases involving an unstable ex, great caution is taken to ensure the safety of everyone in the courtroom. But sometimes people just snap. Paul Henry Gonzalez Jr., a 28-year-old ex-Marine, was arrested this week for brutally beating his estranged wife in front of a judge during the middle of divorce hearing in Florida.

It took a stun gun and several court officers to subdue Gonzalez after he choked Catherine Ann Scott-Gonzalez while hitting her face.

“He was punching with a true vengeance," Scott-Gonzalez's attorney said. "It was vicious.”

Scott-Gonzalez was rushed to the emergency room with a broken nose, broken bones in her face, and a torn lip, according to her boyfriend, Brennan Worsencroft. Reportedly, Mr. Gonzalez flew into a rage because he was ordered to pay child support. Jude Ronald Rothschild ordered Gonzales to pay child support and set visitation rights for the couple’s 1-year-old daughter and 3-year-old son.

Witnesses say Gonzales left the judge’s chambers but returned and began screaming at his wife and the judge. Gonzales then began violently punching his wife while he strangled her. New police reports note that Scott-Gonzalez's attorney jumped in and held Gonzales in a bear hug until authorities arrived. When the police did arrive, Gonzales fought them off until his rampage was ended by shots from a stun gun.

As Gonzalez was pulled out of the chambers by police, his ex-wife had collapsed in a pool of blood near the judge’s chair.

"It was surreal," Scott-Gonzalez's attorney said. "To see that violence play out in a judge's chambers is somewhat surreal."

Catherine Scott-Gonzalez says she had tried to get a restraining order against her ex but couldn’t persuade the court to give her one. Paul Gonzalez is currently jailed on a felony battery charge with a $1 million bond.

Family law attorneys in Pasadena increasingly see information garnered from online social networking sites used as evidence in court. Social networking sites help people connect, but they also have a way of making people’s lives a matter of semi-public record like never before.

For example, let’s say a husband buys a new girlfriend an expensive gift and announces the purchase on Twitter. In court, he may be found to be dispersing marital assets to a third party. Or a wife may try to prove to the court that she is not capable of getting a job, but she may be found pursuing job interviews on LinkedIn, calling her truthfulness into question.

Divorce lawyers are always looking for evidence that might prove advantageous to their clients’ cases, and these days, sites like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook are providing just such an advantage. One lawyer advises clients to screen their social networking pages for anything that could be incriminating while, at the same time, he studies the ex’s pages with a fine-toothed comb. Another lawyer notes that it has become routine to review a client’s web presence — along with that of the ex.

In another example, a mother assured the court that she hadn’t been drinking, but one of her social networking pages showed dated photos of her drinking and smoking. This was used in court to cast doubt on her truthfulness.

Sometimes, a divorcing couple’s children can be affected by the social networking pages of their parents, causing conflict with family law courts. Courts often attempt to stop parents from being disparaging about one another to their children by issuing restraining orders. On the one hand, this is a First Amendment issue because it calls into question whether Internet speech can be blocked. At the same time, it is nearly impossible to stop a child from accessing such information. Some cases have seen harassment campaigns by an ex-spouse on a social networking site that resulted in the issuing of a civil order of protection.

For better or for worse, social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn are playing a key role in family law courts.

Ask anydivorce attorney in Pasadena and they’ll tell you that retaliating against your ex is never a good idea. For further proof, let’s look at the bizarre case of Shawn Robyn Gawronski. Gawronski was arrested last week for setting fire to his ex-wife’s beauty salon in Missoula, Montana. Even crazier is that the 33-year-old Gawronski recently told Missoula County sheriff’s detectives that he used his divorce papers to start the fire.

According to the affidavit filed by Missoula County Deputy Attorney Patricia Bower, while the Gifted Hands Salon was burning, Shawn Gawronski sat in his truck with a gun in his hands as sheriff’s deputies arrived early in the morning on Monday, March 21.

"The court finds you to be a threat to both the victim and the community," Missoula County Justice of the Peace Karen Orzech said on Tuesday. She also set Gawronski’s bail at $200,000, double the amount Bower requested. Not content with setting the fire, Gawronski also admitted to slashing the tires on the vehicles belonging to his mother-in-law, his sister-in-law and her boyfriend. After an outburst from Gawronski’s brother in the courtroom, Orzech set a higher bail and ordered Gawronski to undergo a mental health evaluation.

Officers who arrived at the scene of the fire searched Gawronski’s truck with his permission and found a Browning 9mm handgun, a near empty matchbook, a plastic milk container containing what authorities say looked and smelled like gasoline, a razor blade knife and two pairs of gloves. Once inside the salon, deputies found Gawronski’s divorce papers on a couch. According to the deputies, he doused the salon floor in gasoline but had trouble getting lit so he used his divorce papers and some mail to start the blaze.

"He returned to his truck and watched the fire burn. ... Shawn said he did not want to hurt anyone and was just very angry at his wife," the affidavit said.

Gawronski’s estranged wife Jennifer Warner appeared in court but declined to comment after the proceedings. If charged with arson, he could face up 20 years in prison and/or a $50,000 fine. Gawronski’s next court appearance will take place on April 6.

Divorce attorneys in Pasadena — who have seen their share of wild celebrity exploits — agree that nothing compares to the recent antics of Charlie Sheen. In one week’s time, his hit show on CBS has been temporarily cancelled, he has willingly taken a drug test for an online gossip site and launched a million tirades via interviews with every network and website that would sit still. Now Sheen’s wild behavior has resulted in a restraining order from estranged wife Brooke Mueller, who recently had the police retrieve the couple’s twin sons from Sheen’s home.

On Tuesday, March 1, police arrived at the mansion of Charlie Sheen under instruction from a judge who ordered the twins be returned to their mother. The judge temporarily stripped the actor of custody of the boys after Mueller submitted a declaration stating that Sheen threatened Mueller by saying, “I will cut your head off, put it in a box, and send it to your mom.”

Legal experts say courts don’t take threats like this lightly.

“If a judge receives credible evidence that a person poses a threat to another parent or their children, they grant restraining orders first and ask questions later, to err on the side of caution," says one LA legal expert.

Police officers took the twins, who will turn two this month, back to Mueller who claims Sheen had violated terms of their temporary custody agreement. Prior to the events of the last several months, Sheen was reportedly seeking full custody of the children. Sources close to Mueller say she is in fact sober and currently seeking full custody of the twins.

"I am very concerned that [Sheen] is currently insane," Mueller stated in the document. "I am in great fear that he will find me and attack me and I am in great fear for the children's safety while in his care.”

Sheen, for his part, has told Radaronline.com, “My fangs are dripping with tiger's blood” in response to the removal of his children... and when asked by People magazine if he was ready for a custody battle, he replied via text, “Born ready. Winning.”

A hearing has been set for March 22 to determine if the restraining order should be extended. Sheen and Mueller are both required to attend.

It is a political trend divorce attorneys in Pasadena have seen brewing for quite some time: divorce reform bills. For the last couple of years, a variety of divorce reform acts have been purposed by politicians and lawmakers across the country. Yet just as this trend has gained momentum, two high-profile divorce bills on the ballots in two very different states have been defeated.

In Montana, Republican lawmaker Tom McGillvray proposed a bill that would require divorcing couples to attend seven meetings with a counselor. McGillvray says divorce is damaging a generation of children and thinks counseling could save marriages. Opponents of the bill, however, believe the bill was overstepping its bounds and interfering with the private lives of voters.

"I don't want you telling me what I can and can't do in my married life," argued Democratic Rep. Edie McClafferty. "I'm sure not going to tell anyone what they can and can't do in their married life. Last time I heard, we lived in a free country, people can make their own decisions.

McGillvray’s bill died on the house floor in a 60-40 vote.

Down south in Mississippi, a very different kind of divorce bill also was shot down. The house said "no, thank you" to a bill that would have given a spouse grounds for divorce if they have been away from an abusive situation for five years or longer. Backers of the bill say the bill would have made it easier for victims of abuse to file for divorce after fleeing an abusive situation from a spouse who woudn’t grant them a divorce. The bill had passed earlier in the Senate but was defeated last Thursday on a vote of 81-39. Mississippi law currently allows an abandoned spouse to file for divorce but doesn’t address when one spouse leaves but is denied a divorce by the other spouse.