F & F Supporter Tells His Story of Abuse, Restraining Orders, Separation from His Little Girl in Republican Journal
October 20th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesJon, a Fathers & Families supporter in Maine, is featured in Tanya Mitchell 's Republican Journal article Domestic abuse: One man's story (10/14/09). I often give supporters who write us my advice for how to gain publicity for their cases at http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1880, and what Jon did here is an excellent example of what to do.
The article is illustrative of several common problems for fathers who are victims of domestic abuse, as well as the way domestic violence restraining (i.e. "protection") orders are used as weapons in custody battles.
Jon's ex has battled with mental illness and alcoholism, and the system, rather than channeling her towards getting the help she needed, has instead seen her as a victim and her ex-husband, who tried to help her and has been devoted to their children, as the perp.
Notice too how Jon wasn't able to present his side of the story in any meaningful fashion at any of the DV-related hearings. As so often happens, the system set up to protect battered women was instead used as a sword against a decent man.
Mitchell writes:
When "Jon" first met his ex-wife, "Tracy," 13 years ago, he never thought their relationship would end in a divorce — let alone a protection order, criminal charges, and a fight to obtain regular visitation with his 4-year-old daughter.
But his four-year marriage has ended that way, and Jon said it is largely because today's laws pertaining to domestic violence do little to protect men who are on the receiving end of abuse from their female partners.
Jon said things are improving between him and his ex-wife now, and he has his daughter with him for half of each week, but he wants to share his story to raise awareness about how domestic abuse can affect men.
"I'm not doing this to get back at her, I'm doing this to let people know that this stuff happens," said Jon in a recent interview...Jon said Tracy was generally a good person, but a combination of mental illness and alcohol use would turn her into a person he hardly knew. He stayed in the relationship as long as he did mostly for his child, Jon said, but he also stayed because he felt he was obligated to stand by — and get help for — his wife...
The couple eventually sought marriage counseling, but Jon said while he learned some helpful tools for dealing with Tracy's behavior, he remained unhappy in the relationship because the abuse continued almost daily. For example, if Tracy's behavior became abusive, Jon said the counselor advised him to leave the house. But Jon said he did not want to leave his child behind, and he was worried about what Tracy might do if he took her with him.
"I was afraid she'd call the cops and say I kidnapped her," he said...
One day, just over a year ago, Jon decided to leave the relationship on his own...Jon said he feared what Tracy might do to retaliate, especially when she realized there was no chance for a reconciliation.
"I left, and she started drinking," Jon said. "She did everything she could do to make me stay. But I left for my kids and for me, and I did it for her, too. I knew it would be better for all of us."
On the day Jon left, he and Tracy argued about his decision to end the marriage. While he said he was still concerned about how his choice might affect Tracy, he focused on moving on and went to work the next day.
That's where a police officer came to see him, and presented him with a summons for domestic violence criminal threatening.
Jon said he told the officer he never threatened or harmed Tracy when he left, but the charge still stood. Jon said the officer assured him he would have his day in court.
When his day in court arrived, Jon said he opted to plead no contest to the charge as part of a plea deal that allowed him to serve no jail time. Jon said his memory of his court appearance was more focused on working out details of the plea bargain and very little on the events of the day in question, the day he left Tracy.
"I took this [plea bargain] because it ensured me I would not go to jail and spend time away from my children. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to say anything on my behalf then, either," said Jon.
Meanwhile, Tracy contacted New Hope for Women. Jon said that based on the criminal threatening charge against him, Tracy was able to obtain a temporary protection order against him, and that the order included his daughter.
"With the initial restraining order, I couldn't see my daughter for a month," he said. "Too often they're used as a way to get back at people, even though they're made to protect the people who need them. That was one of the things that made me feel helpless."
When Jon and Tracy went to court again, at which time a judge was asked to make a finding on whether or not Tracy was abused, Jon said he was surprised at what occurred there.
"I asked her to take my daughter off the restraining order, and she immediately said yes to that," he said.
That suggested to Jon that Tracy knew he would not harm their child, he said, and he hoped Tracy would opt to drop the order against him altogether. But that didn't happen, and instead, the judge granted the order — and Jon said it happened without his explanation of what had occurred the day he decided to leave.
"I haven't even had a chance to explain my side yet," he said.
But Jon said he was happy just to have regular visitation with his child, so he arranged for the girl's grandparents to help with pickups and drop-offs. That worked for a while, Jon said, until Tracy would contact the grandparents and ask them to relay a message to Jon asking him to pick the child up at a local store, or at her mother's home.
"Then there was one time when she came out and started talking to me," he said.
The conversation had largely to do with the child and visitation, and Jon said he offered minimal responses as he loaded his daughter into his car.
This happened on at least two more occasions, and Jon said he eventually asked Tracy to stop attempting to communicate with him because of the active protection order against him.
"I finally spoke to her and said if she wanted to be able to speak with me this way, then she needed to drop the protection order, because she was putting me in danger," Jon said.
Jon said he thought nothing of the encounter, until a few days later, when a Waldo County sheriff's deputy arrived at his residence and placed him under arrest for violating the protection order. When he told that officer about what had happened, Jon said, the officer advised that he should have walked away instead of responding to Tracy.
"I at least had to take the time to pick up my child," Jon said. "...But I was treated like a criminal."
As a result of his arrest, Jon spent a night at the Waldo County Jail, his first, and, he hopes, his only, stay there. That charge against Jon is still pending.
Since then he has worked out a new pickup and drop-off schedule for his daughter, and on the few occasions that Tracy has attempted to talk to him, Jon said he has not responded, because of the protection order.
Even with the charges pending against Jon, he said, his life has taken a turn for the better, as has Tracy's. Jon sees his daughter regularly now, and Tracy has gone back to college. Jon said the children are in a better situation, too.
"I just want things to be OK, and for us to get along," said Jon. "And after all of that, I'm still willing to sit down and say 'OK, this is done, I can forgive.'"
Commend Republican Journal Reporter Tanya Mitchell for the article at attmitchell@villagesoup.com or 207-338-3333.
"));
19 queries. 0.358 seconds.
October 20th, 2009 at 10:13 am
This whole story reminds me of similar things that happened to men also unfairly charged and take plea deals and only make the situation worse:
One friend was a TA and one of the female students came back trying to get a better grade on a paper. The gall of such a request should raise eyebrows to begin with. Whatever grade the student got, it was fair unless SHE could find something to prove otherwise. But she decided that as a girl she could bat her eyelashes and get special treatment. He found a point or two for her, but the professor had written something sexist on the paper and he quipped: "You got THAT one right!"
She charged him with sexual harassment.
Observing someone else's sexism, especially when helping the student in question, should not result in him getting a charge. He decided to plea and "apologize" and that's like rolling out a red carpet for abuse. The committee wanted him to then do public service, write a composition, and other penance that made a monastary look lax by comparison. He fell behind and dropped out.
Another is an in-law I have who had a vulgar, but cute working class girl in his department. She cussed like a sailor and he observed that she had a "nice onion" (butt). Instant sexual harassment charge. He also did the plea deal rather than fight. After the case was finished, she was cussing like a sailor again and making sexual innuendo and told him: "_I_ am allowed to! YOU are not!"
Now in the third case, it's me. A woman with a gripe against me told me that I had wasted her time giving her an errand to run because the address didn't have the package. I said I would have loved to have spent a day with another co-worker (in this case, a male) instead of stuck in the office. She thought this might get her something so she said I was saying she should be dating this other co-worker.
I was quietly picked up by a stern HR and had no idea what was going on. I went into a room with three managers and the door was closed and they confronted me with the charge.
I laughed (not too much, obviously.) I said that there was no sexual innuendo whatsoever since I said _I_ would have liked to have gone with the coworker out clearly meaning that this was about getting out of the office as I said. In addition, I pointed out that she was in the marines and was no stranger to strong language. They looked at me and each other with awareness and saw that something was fishy with the charge and it was dismissed.
Another case: A girlfriend went nuts after an argument and called the police. She told them I had guns in the home. I said that simply having guns is not evidence of a threat. The polcewoman tried to trick me into confessing by asking if I had pushed her "even if you didn't intend to hurt her." I said that she had cornered me and I had gently moved past her. The police looked at each other, thought about doing something, but realized I knew what I was doing and by then she had cooled off (realizing I had more on her than vice-versa, perhaps.) I then had the police help me kick HER out!
Perhaps it's my attitude. I indicated to the above men (and policewoman) that I had done nothing wrong, I _KNEW_ what was going on, I _KNEW_ my legal rights, and I knew all of these better than they did. Sit ubu sit. Good dog!
October 20th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Never plead "no contest" to false charges "just to get it over with." Never, ever, ever, ever, ever.
October 20th, 2009 at 11:30 am
...I turned on CNN for a few seconds last and night and they were talking about (drum roll please) the "pay gap" between men and women. Because that fits the men-bad, women-good template unlike Jon's story. So we won't see stories like Jon's in the manstream media.
October 20th, 2009 at 11:53 am
When I would go pick up my daughter I never knew what I was in for.
My ex would verbally abuse me in front of our 8 month old daughter a great percentage of the time. I would always have to go to her place to pick up my daughter.
Once! I responded to verbal garbage by calling her a not so nice name.
She then said I was verbally abusive.
When we went to concilliation court she tried to play the victim by saying I was verbally abusive. The counselor started to look at me as though I was some abuser. I told the counselor that my ex was actually the verbally abusive one and that I was the brunt of this abuse. I then offered a nice solution. I said we can agree to meet at a public place and exchange our daughter. My ex immediately said "I'm not doing that." It didn't take the counselor long to figure out she was full of dog doo- doo and the counselor started treating me like a human being.
October 20th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Dumb. Never plead no contest. Also, if you're in a situation with an abuser - file charges first, don't be a sucker.
We get it that the system is unfair to men. Therefore, men need to use it to their advantage - it's not changing anytime soon.
October 20th, 2009 at 11:56 am
pjk said: "I turned on CNN for a few seconds last and night and they were talking about (drum roll please) the "pay gap" between men and women."
I saw that too Pjk and I immediately emailed CNN and gave them the data. Unreal. They had several advocates all of whom believed the reason men were losing their jobs more than women was because men get paid more so companies now are getting rid of them to keep cheaper employees. All total speculation and no basis in research at all, and totally ignoring the existing research. Typical media crap. We should all email them. it would really help to have alot of emails on that. We should not let stuff like that slide.
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html?39
October 20th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Never plead no contest or guilty to something you didn't do. And never ever speak to the Police or tell your side of the story or say anything, save all that for your lawyer. Follow the million dollar legal advice.
http://bennettandbennett.com/million-dollar_legal_advice
October 20th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
To Marc A: "it would really help to have alot of emails on that. We should not let stuff like that slide."
I am willing to send email but what would you want us to tell them? please explain your email
October 20th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
How sad that this is EXACTLY what happens to a vast majority of soon to be divorced fathers........(Me included).
Most men have NO idea that the Divorce industry thrives on this type of conflict and those in power look the other way when the woman "lawyers up" and gets this type of "Advice" to WIN AT ALL COSTS during the seperation process. The ABA/VAWA are interconnected and it's a shame that our legal system allows this type of conflict to go on. I have had MANY conversations with divorced women who say that in the first meeting with the attorney.......the lawyer usually comes up with this "Strategy" to win in court and ensure FULL custody for the mother along with HIGHER CS/ALIMONY payments due to the "Primary care giver" award from destroying the father.
Men should NOT plea to any DV charge if there was no ACTUAL VIOLENCE involved in the case. Since EVERYTHING is considered DV these days........the use of the VAWA in divorce proceedings is now at an ALL TIME HIGH. It is a SHAME that our legal system is more concerned about FEDERAL $$'s from DV and CS instead of the GOD GIVEN RIGHT for a father to be a father.
My how our society has changed in the past 15 years. What a shame that our "Leaders" in government are more concerned about SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY rather than keeping the father in the life of our children.
Thank you for posting this story. It goes on more than people know and is getting worse with every victory the SPECIAL INTEREST FEMINIST GROUPS get in Washington.
Now with Josephine Biden and Obama in office......it's going to get much worse for us.....Much worse.
October 20th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Mike,
You hit the nail on the head when you say that attorneys stratagize or lawyer up their clients to prepare for a custody fight on the first visit.
Women are now filing 75% of the divorces. What this means is that the women are usually the fist party to hire a lawyer. In my case everything my ex did was so premeditated that I was very lucky I did not fall for the traps that were laid out for me. Most men don't know what hit them until they wake up which by that time the custody fight has already been determined.
The other problem is that the women with the least scruples will gravitate towards the most aggressive lawyers or ones with the least scurples. My ex shopped or went through probably 6 lawyers before she was ready to divorce me. ( LOL, proof that some lawyers have scruples because they would not play her game). Eventually she found one that would. By that time I had gotten wind of what was coming down the pike and filed first.
October 20th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
My EX and I take our child to a pick up and drop off place where we never see each other because she asked for a restraing order (and she had no evidence to show one was needed). The way I understand the current order, I can not attend any functions while she is present. Since under the standard order she has the majority of the time, it is a nice way to keep me from being involved in my childs life and any activities. She made a big mistake last week though. She was late and I was there at 6:00 like I was supposed to be. Instead of calling and letting them know (as she is so afraid) she just parked in front of my car and walked inside with me standing there. I of course just asked my child to give his mother a hug and we left. I am definately willing to go back to court to show that all of this is just a hoax on her part.
October 20th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Lesson one: never settle or plea bargain in court. Go to trial EVERY TIME. Force your ex to cough up the facts in front of a TRIAL judge, not some bozo who hears the TRO's. You will lose every time in the lower kangaroo court. Play the game...if she files a TRO on you, file one on her....likely they both get thrown out.
Lesson two: When you are married, ALWAYS assume it will fail and that you will have to battle for everything. Men are blindsided every time by divorce. Be prepared, keep watch on the money if your bills are comingled, make certain you spend all the time you can with your children. Go to every function, party, play, concert, game...when the inevitable happens you can show how much of an involved parent you are.
Lesson three: never, ever trust any kind of friendship with the opposite sex in the office, especially if you are a supervisor. If you have to talk to a female for any reason make certain there is a witness in the room with you. Never, ever be alone with a coworker.
Sad it had to get to this...
October 20th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Thanks Marc A. I too saw the panel of women on CNN. I just sent an email to CNN saying they are doing women a dis-service by telling them that they are only paid 78cents/dollar as a man, and that they only reason women aren't losing jobs is because they are cheaper labour.
I told them, if they want to empower women, they should be telling them the truth. That women, with the same work experience and education are paid the same as a male for the same job. I told them that men are losing jobs because the recession is hitting those industries that males typically dominate (construction, manufacturing, oil production etc). I told them women dominate in more recession proof jobs (health care, teaching, social services) and that is why they are not losing jobs at the same rate.
I also told that women place a higher value on benefits, rather than pay, in jobs. I told them that it all boils down to CHOICE, and that women should not be blaming "gender discrimination" if they make choices that in the end don't satisfy them. Or something to that effect. Of course, CNN KNOWs all this, so why subject viewers to these kind of lies?
It was crazy, seeing a panel of highly paid, highly successful women saying all this stuff. If these women REALLY want other women to be empowered, the truth is all it would take, that womens lives are shaped by their choices, and the gender blame game is over. This kind of talk has the opposite effect and makes me wonder what reason powerful women have for continuing these lies? (Sorry, got off topic for this post).
October 20th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
re: Of course, CNN KNOWs all this, so why subject viewers to these kind of lies?
...Why? Because it creates conflict, which the news business enjoys, and it fits perfectly the politically correct template of man-bad, women-good. Think they want to do stories about men being arrested on false charges? Nope...
October 20th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
"I can forgive"?????? Jon, are you serious? You are dealing with a psychopath with no redeeming values who is bent on destroying you. If you were deployed in Afghanistan somewhere and you were surrounded by men trained to kill you, how forgiving of them would you be as they fired bullets at you? Same situation, only that the psycho you are dealing with uses the courts as her weapon. Live your life and be happy but do not fool yourself into thinking you EVER have to forgive her to be whole. The only thing you need to do is love your daughter.
October 20th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
At least doing stories on men arrested under false pretense wouldn't be destroying what miniscule credibility they have left.
October 20th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
I'm aware of a situation very similar to Jon's, except that the man didn't agree to any plea bargains--but still was prevented from being heard as much as the woman. Thanks Glenn for covering this and thanks for the link to your advice.
Separately:
John Boy Says:
October 20th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
...
The other problem is that the women with the least scruples will gravitate towards the most aggressive lawyers or ones with the least scurples. My ex shopped or went through probably 6 lawyers before she was ready to divorce me. ( LOL, proof that some lawyers have scruples because they would not play her game). Eventually she found one that would. By that time I had gotten wind of what was coming down the pike and filed first.
-------------------------------------
I just wanted to reinforce the idea that there are lawyers with scruples. I'm not an attorney--though my judge has forgotten that fact on a number of occasions--but in my experience and understanding, there indeed are lawyers with scruples.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:02 am
Concerned Dad,
I will see you and raise you. My experience has been the legal advice I have gotten is much better then the advice I've recieved from the thereputic community. They have been next to useless.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:46 am
Marc A. Says:
October 20th, 2009 at 11:56 am
If people would turn OFF the TV or not have a TV in the house, TV would have no power.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:50 am
Brian:
If you were deployed in Afghanistan somewhere and you were surrounded by men trained to kill you, how forgiving of them would you be as they fired bullets at you?
Well at least you know they are honest enough to be upfront about their intent to kill you unlike the sneaky wife that is plotting behind your back and smiling in your face. I'd much rather have an honest enemy than a dishonest friend.
pjk:
Think they want to do stories about men being arrested on false charges? Nope...
That would explain why those "rape" stories like Hofstra and so on almost immediately die in the mainstream media as soon as it looks like the allegations are false. Unless someone wants to convice me they would have still died down the same way if the evidence showed that they did rape her.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:01 pm
To Mark A and pjk:
NEVER watch CNN!! Try foxnews!!!! a REAL media company!!
October 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
to 2ndwife
Don't waste your breath on the drive by, mainstream, state sponsored liberal, woman=hero, man=tyrant media. Switch to fox!!
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:03 am
Primarily, the win or lose nature of the family courts has not changed as a result of the self-interest of lawyers. State governments have not enacted a rebuttable presumption for shared parenting, and this is evidence that the family courts and family law is set up to be of the lawyers, by the lawyers and for the lawyers.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:09 am
"I finally spoke to her and said if she wanted to be able to speak with me this way, then she needed to drop the protection order, because she was putting me in danger," Jon said.
"Jon said he thought nothing of the encounter, until a few days later, when a Waldo County sheriff's deputy arrived at his residence and placed him under arrest for violating the protection order. "
Tracy has "power and control" issues.