BILLS FILED IN NEW YORK PROPOSING ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF THOSE THAT HAD RESTRAINING ORDERS ISSUED AGAINST THEM

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

BILLS FILED IN NEW YORK PROPOSING ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF THOSE THAT HAD RESTRAINING ORDERS ISSUED AGAINST THEM

New York has finally completely lost it. In addition to handing out restraining orders like lollipops, now there are bills filed to make such individuals wear electronic monitoring devices. We are not talking about sex offenders or anybody convicted of a crime and out on parole. We are talking about your nickel and dime restraining order case where a criminal conviction was not possible. Welcome George Orwell’s “Big Brother” of the novel 1984. Goodbye privacy. This is the acme of personal invasion and personal degradation. It is one thing to require a man to wear an electronic monitoring device that has been convicted of attempted murder and is out on bail. It is another to force a man to wear one when there was an argument after he caught his wife cheating on him—a common scenario where a restraining order issues.

One company that makes the devices, Omnilink Systems, couldn’t be giddier. They sent out a press release regarding their hope that the bill becomes law. People who have actually been convicted of actual serious acts of domestic violence are usually already imprisoned. Restraining orders are often given out after heated arguments when the woman claims she was afraid. States the press release, “We applaud State Assemblyman Ortiz and the State of New York for working aggressively to pass Bill A5424 for the public safety of New Yorkers.” Don’t forget Omnilink to also send him a nice, fat check. There website is http://www.omnilinksystems.com Congratulations Omnilink, and welcome to the Domestic Violence Industry. Join the dozens of mental health professionals, probation officers, judges, clerks, and court house personal that would have to go out and get real jobs if getting a restraining order wasn’t as simple and easy as ordering a Big Mac. Celltrack is another company trying to get rich at the expense of fathers.

One Arizona law firm, Baker Law Associates, has on their website, “However, some communities are aggressively prosecuting domestic violence crimes, in which case jail time, house arrest, and electronic monitoring are routinely sought, even in first offenses and cases with only minor injuries. Subsequent offenses are almost always charged as more serious offenses, carrying more serious penalties. The main goal of a firm experienced in domestic violence cases is to get the charges dropped or reduced to a lesser offense and keep you out of jail. The prosecution may seek to introduce evidence of prior domestic violence incidents, whether or not they resulted in convictions. Many state legislatures have created exceptions to the rules of evidence, making evidence of prior uncharged incidents of domestic violence admissible, even though evidence of other crimes are not. If you have had prior charges brought against you, you must contact your defense attorney as soon as you believe that other charges may be brought.”

Notes George Courtney of the Fathers’ Rights Association of New York, “This needs to be widely publicized and defeated at all costs. It is tantamount to Nazi law.” In restraining order cases, there need be no witnesses, there need be no evidence corroborating the claim, and in many instances restraining orders issue when there was not violence or the threat of violence. Often, the person that is issued a restraining order didn’t initiative the violence, or in cases when there was no violence, did not initiate the argument.

Elaine Epstein, former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association, admitted, “Everyone knows that restraining orders and orders to vacate are granted to virtually all who apply…In many cases, allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage.” (Epstein E. Speaking the unspeakable, Massachusetts Bar Association Newsletter, 1993.) Now they can be used not only for a tactical advantage, but to cause the most extreme humiliation.

RADAR, a group that seeks accuracy in domestic violence reporting, states that “In most states a person can get a restraining order simply by claiming he or she is ‘afraid’ or ‘fearful,’ without providing proof or verification. As a result, half of all restraining orders are issued without even an allegation of physical abuse. In most cases, it is the husband or boyfriend who the target of the order.” http://www.mediaradar.org/press_release_20060906.php

Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq.
Spokesperson of the Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition
http://www.berkshirefatherhood.com
413-445-6789

A Senate and House version of a Bill mandating people where electronic monitoring devices have been filed in New York. The Bills are House Bill AO524 and Senate Bill S4796

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A05424

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S4796