Month June 2018

#MeToo Politician Sunny Reynolds’ Protective Order TOSSED

Moderator 6 Comments

“I actually thought he actually could have hit me.”

—Former Warrenton, Virginia Vice Mayor Sunny Reynolds

Translation: He didn’t actually hit her.

Question: Is the subjective impression that someone “could have” committed an act of violence a valid—or even rational—basis to seek the state’s protection after the moment has passed, and there was no violence?

Considering that statutes that authorize injunctive relief were enacted to check violence that actually occurred (or at least was actually threatened), the answer is a pretty resounding no.

Here, remarkably, is an instance of a judge actually agreeing.

A complaint of abuse by (now former) Warrenton, Virginia Vice Mayor Sunny Reynolds, one that has been criticized on this site, was this month thrown out by the court.

Context: Local real estate developer Keith MacDonald was alleged to have verbally accosted Ms. Reynolds in a restaurant in February, pointed his finger at her, and said, “I’m going to get you.” Then: “All it takes is 125 votes.” In other words, Mr. MacDonald allegedly threatened to run against her in an election that has since seen Ms. Reynolds unseated.

Judge Jeffrey Parker, as quoted in the Fauquier Times:

“I have little doubt the behavior was rude and impolite and made the petitioner uncomfortable,” Parker said. “This statue is not about rudeness or a lack of politeness” but, rather, calls for a level of force or threats that invoke “a reasonable apprehension” of death, sexual assault or bodily injury.

Ms. Reynolds, in contrast, reportedly testified she felt Mr. MacDonald’s spittle on her face.

Copyright © 2018 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com

*The cost to Virginia taxpayers for this self-indulgent public tantrum by a member of their government, which involved law enforcement officials, besides several courts, and surely ran to the thousands of dollars, was not reported by the Fauquier Times.

Letter to the Editor Notes How Claims of “Abuse” Are Used to Exert Control

Moderator Leave a comment

Some recent critical scrutiny by the author of this blog was inspired by a restraining order petitioned by Warrenton, Virginia Vice Mayor Sunny Reynolds against a constituent and political rival of hers.

Since the March prosecution, Ms. Reynolds has been voted out of office (reportedly by a margin of 2 to 1) and replaced by a male candidate whose campaign stressed change.

What follows quotes former Warrenton town council member Yakir Lubowsky, who reminds readers of the Fauquier Times how being a citizen of the United States is supposed to be different from being a citizen of China (see First Amendment). What Mr. Lubowsky highlights is an emergent social trend that is hardly new but has newly been brought to the fore by social media: assuming the victim pose to silence unfavorable opinions (which has notably been remarked elsewhere in recent months).

The quotation below appeared in a letter to the editor last week and is in response to critical remarks by Ms. Reynolds concerning an earlier letter by Mr. Lubowsky (who writes that he composed two). Ms. Reynolds reports on her campaign website that she has filed a formal complaint with the State Board of Elections, apparently on this basis: “Mr. Lubowsky’s letter…presents nothing more than an accusatory opinion.” The last this writer heard, opinions were protected under our Constitution’s free speech clause.

Mr. Lubowsky (stresses added):

I wrote two letters, a short one that appeared in Fauquier Now [and] was also faithfully reproduced on approximately 1,200 leaflets (distributed lawfully in the spirit of the founding of our Republic); and a longer one which went viral through emails, and appears to have been read by hundreds more.

Both letters only criticize [politician Sunny Reynolds’] conduct, not her personality, and by points detailed and supported in each case by examples. Readers of both my letter(s) and Sunny’s will notice that hers does not respond meaningfully to any of these censures.

Sunny dismisses my criticisms as simple animosity. Yet she points out herself that I worked with her at the town council and voted for her to be vice mayor. (Moreover, as many know, Sunny and I had cordial relations during most of our time as colleagues.) No, my letters are neither angry nor personal, as is evident from even a casual reading. The letters are substantive indictments of Sunny’s injudicious behavior.

Finally, as to style, Sunny characterizes her own energetic engagement as “fervent” or “spirited”; while that of others, especially men, as “bullying.” She plays this card whenever useful, for example forcing our colleague Sean Polster into an absurd “mediation” and bringing specious charges against candidate Keith MacDonald in court.

What Mr. Yubowsky observes is an isolated point on the fringe of a very long shadow that has been steadily eclipsing citizens’ civil rights for decades.

Copyright © 2018 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com

*Had Mr. Lubowsky’s critical opinions been ad hominem attacks, had they been rude, hurtful, ill-supported, or even off-the-wall, they would still be protected speech in this country.