Well it happened, PFA on my friend and he has questions

[mjfletcher]

there should be... but there aren't, and that is the issue. If the person completing a PFA was held liable under civil or criminal law then I would say they are fine... but they aren't. There is no recourse for the person that has a PFA filed against them.

23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106

(a) 1 False reports.--A person who knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer with the intent to implicate another under this chapter commits an offense under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4906 (relating to false reports to law enforcement authorities).

There is recourse, but the victim has to actually file the complaint of false reports for it to go anywhere.

My buddies ex's lawyer TOLD her to do it as it works in their favor to get a speedy divorce in most cases and gives one spouse all the power over the other. Whoever gets the PFA first holds all the cards, holds the house, the possessions... everything.

The hope is the spouse will just plead it out, and then this is used as leverage in the divorce. As soon as her lawyer heard he had a lawyer on retainer and they were fighting it they decided to drop it at the court house (of course after he got charged the lawyers fee for showing up to trial).

And the best part? the vast majority of PFA is "whoever strikes first, WINS". There is no proof necessary, its 100% he said / she said, no witnesses are needed (although they can help or hurt). Its all about "what happens behind closed doors", just like Terroristic Threats... no witnessed needed, "He said he would go berserk if I ever divorced him and now I did so I'm worried"... PFA granted

Sadly, thats a common abuse of the law. The courts are getting better at weeding those out though, but theres still some judges out there that hand them out like candy.

As far as I am aware a PFA DOES forbid the person issued against from handling firearms http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_...&state_code=PA

Under certain conditions, I already posted the pertinent section of the law to another poster.

[mjfletcher]

yes, of course. i said "women" without really thinking about it because every abuse of PFAs that i have ever heard of was a wife or girlfriend (or ex-either) using them against husband/boyfriend (or ex-either).

but, certainly sex should not matter at all before the law.

No prob, figured it was just a slip. As another poster pointed out, its become common practice in divorces and breakups to abuse a PFA to try to get leverage.

[God's Country]

It doesn't matter, unless the baby momma wants to give up free money, it won't mean a damn as far as child support goes. His name is on the certificate and he has raised it for years as his own... its his.

All the more reason for a paternity test beforehand.

[headcase]

And just what laws would have been applied? The one that took the police out of the equation when it became a mental health issue? The one that said he couldn't be involuntarily committed because by the time the shrink talked to him he was calm, coherent, rational, etc? The law that makes harassment (IF you can prove it) a summary offense with just a fine meaning no arrest?

Basic laws work in basic situations. There is nothing basic about domestic abuse, especially when someone knows how the system works and is able to use that knowledge to avoid prosecution for their actions.



Fear of being killed if you try to leave is the most common reason I've seen for staying in abusive relationships. Second most common reason I've seen is an ex who refuses to stay away resulting in losing hope of being free and just giving up. Most abusers use fear to control their victims, and fear can be a very powerful weapon.



She tried to get away, she asked for help getting away, she used the means at her disposal to accomplish that.



How is there no due process? When filing a PFA you have to provide a reason you are requesting it based on statements given the judge may issue a temporary PFA and if so a hearing scheduled within 7 days. At that hearing, both parties provide evidence and testimony to support their claims and/or refute the others. The judge then makes a ruling based on the evidence and testimony. That sounds like due process to me.

In fact, that sounds like alot more due process than comes with filing an assault charge against someone. That results in arrest and sitting in a cell till they get their day in court. With PFAs they get to continue living their life while waiting for their day in court with the only restriction being they have to stay away from the person that filed it until then.



Just what liberty is sacrificed? The liberty to threaten someone? The liberty to abuse someone? The liberty to victimize someone?

If judges are giving them to people who do not have legitimate need for them the problem lies with the judges, not with the PFA's. We don't tolerate anti's blaming the acts of people who use guns in a criminal manner on guns, yet here you are blaming the acts of people who use the law in a criminal manner on the law.

Honestly, that argument sounds similar to many of the arguments I've heard the anti's use as justification for taking our guns.



Then I guess in your opinion I wasn't justified in getting one against him as well then? Both her and I still have PFA's against him, its why when he shows up at my door intending to get me to tell him where she moved to he gets arrested instead of just being told leave or be cited for harassment. I've found that PFA to be quite helpful, its kept my gun from being fired anywhere other than at the range.

Its not only women and children that can get them, room mates, co-workers, siblings, parents, etc can get them as well.. Other states have Restraining Orders, We has PFA's, its an RO by another name but still just an RO.




Re-read my original post, specifically this part:



I didn't witness the attack. I did witness him sittin on the front steps with his clothing soaking wet. I did witness the bathtub still full of water. I did witness the bleeding cuts on her hands and the bloody knife on the floor. I did witness the bruise on her shoulder shaped just like the head of the hammer that I witnessed laying on the floor.



When one is terrified of leaving someone out of fear they'll kill them what should they do?

She got herself and her son somewhere she knew she'd be able to get help. She asked for that help and got it, and because of his actions and history it was necessary to have the courts order him to stay away from her to be able to actually have him charged with more than BS summary offenses.

She should have filed charges against him for the attacks. What would she have done if the PFA option wasn't there? A persons inability to act due to fear should not subject me to the possibility of having my rights violated on a simple accusation, and that is what a PFA does.

I'll let the anti remarks slide.

These things are a tool in the toolbox, but they shouldn't be. Here is the general so called due process in a PFA proceeding:

Her> *Sniff* Your honor, he threatened to kill me.
Him> ??!!What??!! Your honor, I certainly did no such thing!
Judge> *Bang* Order granted, turn in your guns. Fill out the financial paperwork with the clerk and half your pay now gets deducted and deposited in her account. If you are within 100 feet of her you will spend the next month in jail. *bang* Next!

No reason to go further here as far as I'm concerned. I'll agree to disagree with you here on this subject.

[Dredly]

There is recourse, but the victim has to actually file the complaint of false reports for it to go anywhere.

Sadly, thats a common abuse of the law. The courts are getting better at weeding those out though, but theres still some judges out there that hand them out like candy.

Under certain conditions, I already posted the pertinent section of the law to another poster.

There is no recourse unless the person that completed the PFA admits to lieing under oath... and you can count how many times that happens. Its all he said she said.

I believe the only thing they can get hit with is falsifying a police report

[Koli01]

I was going to stay out of this. But, I watch Lifetime TV Network ( I am secure in my manhood) and what it has shown me is:

1. PFA's aren't worth the paper they are written on.
2. If a woman is really that afraid.....she won't even have one done for fear that it will piss the guy off more.
3. A piece of paper has never stopped anyone from getting killed or beaten.
4. They are great for harassing guys that would have been decent in the first place.
5. If they had any teeth to them. Say, you violate the PFA then you go to jail for 50 years. 10 day, month anything like that will only serve to piss him off more and get her a worse beating or killed.

Sounds a lot like gun laws to me.

[mjfletcher]

She should have filed charges against him for the attacks.

I'll say this yet again, the moment the shrink was called by the hospital it was no longer a criminal matter, it was a mental health matter. She COULD NOT file charges at that point.

What would she have done if the PFA option wasn't there?

She would've called the police to report harassment, maybe got him cited, maybe got him fined him fined, and definitely continue to have him showing up at her job everynight, showing up at home everyday, follow her everywhere she went, continue to threaten her etc, etc.

A persons inability to act due to fear should not subject me to the possibility of having my rights violated on a simple accusation, and that is what a PFA does.

If theres nothing to support the accusation the PFA doesnt get granted, been there, done that, got a PFA against him myself. Been there, done that, still doing it.

I'll let the anti remarks slide.

I actually expected that.

These things are a tool in the toolbox, but they shouldn't be.

On the day that everyone in the country accepts "i dont want to be with you anymore" and just walks away they'll rust and fall away to dust. Until then, they're a necessary tool to provide victims with means of dealing with their abusers. Without them, abusers will only get a slap on the wrist and continue to abuse their victims. Or would you prefer to have someone who is like a sister to me laying dead somewhere because she had no way of getting her abuser hit with more than just summary harassment? Thats the choice, PFA's or dead people, most of them the victims.

Here is the general so called due process in a PFA proceeding:

Her> *Sniff* Your honor, he threatened to kill me.
Him> ??!!What??!! Your honor, I certainly did no such thing!
Judge> *Bang* Order granted, turn in your guns. Fill out the financial paperwork with the clerk and half your pay now gets deducted and deposited in her account. If you are within 100 feet of her you will spend the next month in jail. *bang* Next!

Wrong, as previously stated, been there, done that, still doing it. I've been in the courtroom while the hearing was going on. "he threatened me" with nothing to support it doesnt cut it unless the judge isn't doing their job and is completely ignoring the law.

Trying to argue how PFA's and getting one works with someone who has one against someone is a losing proposition.

As it stands right now, when the PFA expires at the end of august itll get renewed again because he's been to my door 3 times since last august, each time screaming through the window next to the buildings front door for me to "OPEN THIS FUCKING DOOR AND TELL ME WHERE THE BITCH IS!!! I HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHERE SHE IS!!! LET ME IN AND TELL ME WHERE THE FUCK SHE IS!!" Real rational indivicual there. When the police rol around the corner onto the block he instantly stops screaming and stands there completley calm, sometimes even wringing the doorbell again. He always denies having seen me come down the steps. And because of the PFA, he always gets arrested for violating it.

People like him are the reason why we have and need PFAs.[/QUOTE]

No reason to go further here as far as I'm concerned. I'll agree to disagree with you here on this subject.

Fine by me.

[mjfletcher]

There is no recourse unless the person that completed the PFA admits to lieing under oath... and you can count how many times that happens. Its all he said she said.

I believe the only thing they can get hit with is falsifying a police report

Police report, court documents, and if they walk into the hearing and under oath repeat the false statements they made when filing the PFA, lying under oath. Dickhead pulled the standard routine of filing a PFA against her within hours of being served with the temporary order, filled it with a mountain of lies that were proven in court, and got nailed with all 3 by the judge.

[Dredly]

Police report, court documents, and if they walk into the hearing and under oath repeat the false statements they made when filing the PFA, lying under oath. Dickhead pulled the standard routine of filing a PFA against her within hours of being served with the temporary order, filled it with a mountain of lies that were proven in court, and got nailed with all 3 by the judge.

some people really are that stupid I guess.

I would be much more impressed if the TPA came with a LTCF firearm permit to protect the abused. Want to put teeth to it? there ya go

I think if I was in your situation I would be armed every minute of every day. Good luck

btw - I don't think ANYONE has any issue with PFA's being used for their REAL purpose, like yours. Its the abuse of them that really ticks most people off

[mjfletcher]

I was going to stay out of this. But, I watch Lifetime TV Network ( I am secure in my manhood)

Where else you gonna see classic comedies like Night Court?
/me misses having something more than basic cable.

and what it has shown me is:

1. PFA's aren't worth the paper they are written on.
2. If a woman is really that afraid.....she won't even have one done for fear that it will piss the guy off more.
3. A piece of paper has never stopped anyone from getting killed or beaten.
4. They are great for harassing guys that would have been decent in the first place.
5. If they had any teeth to them. Say, you violate the PFA then you go to jail for 50 years. 10 day, month anything like that will only serve to piss him off more and get her a worse beating or killed.

1. Depends on the individual. For some people, prison sentences aren't worth the time served either but we still put people in jail only to have them get out and do the same thing over again.
2. Until someone knows they can safely act they're not going to do anything. Would you try to reach for your gun while staring down the barrel of a criminals, or would you wait till he turned it somewhere else?
3. Kept my friend from being beaten or killed. More importantly, it gives the person the opportunity to get as far away as they can and provides a means of giving someone more than just a slap on the wrist.
4. Its not just women that abuse them and the courts have gotten alot wiser to the standard scams that get pulled. Men are just as guilty of abusing PFAs as women are, its become SOP for breakups with lawyers even telling their clients to do it.
5. All the teeth in the world don't mean a thing when judges refuse to use them. Within certain limits, how long a person serves, if any time at all, for violating is at the judges discretion.

23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6114

§ 6114. Contempt for violation of order or agreement

(b) Trial and punishment.--

(1) A sentence for contempt under this chapter may include:
(i)(A) a fine of not less than $300 nor more than $1,000 and imprisonment up to six months; or
(B) a fine of not less than $300 nor more than $1,000 and supervised probation not to exceed six months; and
(ii) an order for other relief set forth in this chapter.

The judge gets to decide if its prison time for 10 days, 6 months, or just some probation.

Sounds a lot like gun laws to me.

Except gun laws are passed to do nothing more than control the law abiding and make them victims/criminals while PFAs are issued to protect the law abiding to help keep them from becoming victims.