Browsing All posts tagged under »restraining order trials«

“I Reckon”: The Standard of Proof Applied by Judges to Restraining Order Cases

September 30, 2016


As the story goes, civil restraining orders are awarded to plaintiffs who demonstrate by a “preponderance of the evidence” that they need one. According to this story, a judge determines by actuarial science that there’s a 51% or greater probability that the petitioner’s need is valid, that is, that s/he’s representing some facts and his […]

What Restraining Order Defendants Need to Know That No One Ever Tells Them: The Truth Doesn’t Matter

June 28, 2015


The ambition of this post, an intermission between considerations of graver subjects, is to dispel restraining order defendants’ faith in the value of “truth.” Defendants are led to believe that if they’re truthful in the defiance of lies or hyped allegations, all will turn out as it should. But truth is a false idol that […]

In Perspective: How to Look at Restraining Order Judges Neutrally

March 15, 2015


It’s hard not to hate judges who issue rulings that may be based on misrepresentations or outright fraud when those rulings (indefinitely) impute criminal behavior or intentions to defendants, may set defendants up for further (or serial) malicious prosecutions by the same false accuser (and possibly land them in jail), and may finally inflict severe privations, […]

“She Said That I Had Been Burning Him Intentionally and That I Had Kidnapped Him”: Aaron’s Story of Restraining Order Abuse

February 27, 2015


The account below was recently submitted as a comment to, a site I’ve mentioned in several recent posts. Its administrator, Larry Smith, a former attorney, has been waging a one-man war on corruption excited by his relentless persecution through and by the legal system since 2011. Aaron’s story is one of a spiteful ex-partner […]

Cross-Examination: Yet Another Way the Deck Is Stacked against Restraining Order Defendants

February 23, 2015


Perusing the trial transcript of a North Carolina man, former attorney Larry Smith, forcefully brought something to my attention last week, namely, that cross-examination can make or break a defense. Larry extricated himself last summer from the latest of an endless series of fraudulent complaints and prosecutions brought against him by a vexatious litigant—this trial revolved around […]