A Distorted View Of Intervention Orders in Our Courts.

It was the 28th August 2012, in Courtroom Eight Magistrate Jillian Crowe was hearing Intervention Order Cases, She said to The Legal Representatives Of Both Parties in Adjourning the case, Do You really want to appear back in Court in December???, Some People have a Distorted View of What Intervention Orders can Do, They can't make a Sad person Happy.

What an Understatement by Magistrate Crowe, Of Course many People have a distorted View of What Intervention Orders Can Do and also what they Should Be used For as well. This applies To Magistrate's in Victorian Magistrate's Court's as well.

The History of Intervention Order's and AVO'S In Australia is Littered With Tragic Stories Of people who have been Killed because they Falsely Believed that Intervention Orders would Protect Them, because they had a distorted View Of What Intervention Orders Can Do.

 In Effect The Whole Intervention Order Process is Built on a Distorted View that Handing Intervention Orders to everybody Will Somehow Prevent Violence In Family situations. This approach has never Been Successful, it doesn't work.

I Have Sat in Magistrate Doug Bolster's Court Many Times and Heard him say to an applicant, If there is a Breech of The Intervention Order, call the police and they will become Involved.

Yes that may well happen but not in the way Magistrate Doug Bolster May think.

TWO  000 calls were made By Penny Pratt in Melbourne who was murdered minutes later  after an emergency operator did not pass the request for attendance to police. "I'm hiding in a bush answering your questions,"  Ms Pratt said, adding there were "three violent offenders" after her

In This Case Penny Pratt rang 000 to Get Police assistance, The Police did become Involved, but only after the Tragic Death of Penny Pratt, In Many cases People needing assistance By Police just Don't have The Time To call, Given the Violent Nature of Their Circumstances.

To hand Somebody a Piece Of Paper and Then Simply say, Ring The Police, Is a very Distorted and unrealistic approach  to What can be a very Dangerous Physical Threat. So after This Distorted Process Predictably Fails, What Does The Legal Authorities in Victoria Do????, Get More Police or More Trained 000 Staff???. No, They Just go out and change the Intervention Order Legislation again, Making the Orders even more Draconian.


The Next Case Before Magistrate Jillian Crowe is an example of How Ridiculous The Intervention Order Process has Become. The Defendant's Intervention Order had been in Place For Nearly 11 years and The Defendant had no Contact with his ex Wife at all in Nearly 9 Years. The defendant had Previously Sought Variations to The Order to Continue attending a Public Facility that he had been a member of, for About 11 Years. The Defendant has now been attending a Different Public Facility since 2004 to get away from his Vindictive Ex-In-laws.

Magistrate Jillian Crowe asked The Defendant how many times he had Previously Sought a Variation to The Intervention Order, Possibly about 2 or 3 Times, I Don't Really Know Replied the Defendant.

Since going to another Place Of Recreation in 2004 every application to end The Intervention Order Since That Time had been Heard By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly at Heidelberg Magistrate's Court,

 In 2004 The Defendant had taken out a membership At a Different Leisurecentre and Regularly attended the Public Facility Pictured at Left, none Of The Defendant's Ex-In-Laws Worked There or used the Facility.

Even Though the Defendant was using these Facilities To get away from His ex-in-laws and Avoid any Possibilty of a Breech of an Intervention Order. When the Defendant rang The Local Magistrate's Court and was Put Through to The Intervention Order Desk.




The Defendant was told he would still be Breeching an Intervention Order if One Of His Ex-in-laws Walked Into This Facility.So Even though The Defendant was now going Somewhere else to avoid his ex-in-laws, that did not eliminate the possibility of a Breech of the Intervention Order, Unless the Defendant Left The Leisurecentre. Considering the Penalties for Breeching an Intervention Order in Victoria are 2 Years Jail or a $28,000 Fine, it is far Better to Be Safe than end up Locked in a Police Jail Cell.

In the foyer Outside Courtroom Eight, I spoke to a guy Whose Female Partner had Taken an Intervention Order against Him, his Partner had then started coming Over To Visit Him, For This he was Eventually charged for Breeching an Intervention Order and was Told it was His Responsibility, Not His partner's to Keep away From Her. This is exactly the same as The Leisurecentre Situation, You can go elsewhere to avoid the Affected Family Member, but if they come to where you are, it is the Defendant's responsibility to keep away from the AFM.

It is Certainly a very Distorted and Ridiculous application of a Breech of Intervention Order.So Magistrate Jillian Crowe's Statement that People have a Distorted View Of What Intervention Order's can do is Definately True, But How Ridiculous can It Get????

 In Western Australia ,Bradley Jones was Convicted of Killing his Wife Saori after Punching Her and Leaving Her Dead Body In The House Decomposing for 2 Weeks. Despite The Fact a Drunken Bradley Jones Punched His wife in the Head during an argument. During Jones Sentencing Before Justice Lindy Jenkins , She said The Circumstances of This offence is Very serious Because you admitted hitting Your wife Very Hard

Justice Lindy Jenkins Then sentenced Bradley Jones To Five Years Jail, with a Non Parole Period Of  3 Years.

Bradley Jones is Lucky that he was sentenced in Western Australia by Justice Lindy Jenkins, Rather than appearing Before Magistrate Denise O'Reilly in Victoria.

Back In 2003 an Intervention Order was granted By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly For a Period  of 5 Years over a Woman's Complaint that her Cat Feeding Containers were Disappearing(Pictured At Left).

The Woman Even Told The Court that she wanted The Defendant in This Ridiculous Order to pay For The Cost of her Missing Food & Water Containers.


She told the Magistrate that she feared the Defendant would Punch Her and Take her Containers, which didn't make sense as the containers were placed in a Public Carpark at the rear of  a strip Shopping Complex. They Containers could be taken by anybody at any Time.


So In Western Australia you can receive a five Year Maximum Sentence For Manslaughter for punching & Killing your wife, with a Minimum of three, yet in Victoria you can end up with a five Year intervention Order Over the Disappearance of Cat feeding Containers?????.

Back In Courtroom Eight Before Magistrate Jillian Crowe, The Defendant seeking a Variation To His intervention Order which had been in place for Nearly 11 Years, asked why his application to vary the order should not be granted, when Violent Offenders like Bradley Jones will only Serve a Maximum 5 Years for Manslaughter. I Won't Comment on That was Magistrate Jillian Crowe's Reply to The Defendant's Question. The Defendant wanted to Know why an Intervention Order in Victoria Should last much longer than a Manslaughter Charge in Western Australia, The Sentencing laws do Not Make any Sense.

Victorian Magistrate's Demand that Defendant's or AFM's answer Their Questions Precisely, Yet if you ask a magistrate for a Clarification or Explanation Regarding an Intervention Order, if they don't want to or Can't answer Your question, they ignore you very Quickly.

In Another Case In a  Melbourne Court, an elderly women applied for an Intervention Order against another Elderly Woman Living in The Same Retirement Village, the Applicant Told The Magistrate that she wanted the Defendant stopped From going Past Her Unit from 4 Times a day to Only Twice a day. The Defendant told The magistrate she was only going Past To Visit her Friend's in The Village. The Magistrate granted The Final Intervention Order application for 12 Months and The Defendant could not Come within 20 Metres of The Applicant's Unit and had to walk on the Concrete Paths on either Side of the Applicant's Unit. What a distorted Decision handed Down By The Court!!!!, A Dispute Between two elderly Women in a Retirement Village????.

In Melbourne we're told that Family Violence is Increasing and we're Being Led to Believe it is all Because of Abusive and Violent Husbands, which is not really True.

For a long Time in Clubs, Hotels and entertainment Areas, Fight's and Street Violence has Dramatically Increased, resulting in a number of Deaths. Many of These Younger people Involved in These Fights return Home to Their Parents Homes Drunk or on Drugs, More Parents Are Finding They can't Cope with This anymore and Turn to Intervention Orders to protect Themselves From Their Children. Reports of Their Children Banging on Windows & Doors to get Their Parents to Let Them Into the House Have Increased, One application was against a son who came to his parent's house to abuse his parents for not giving him $15,000 to Buy a Car.

These situations can also Lead To Other Applications Before The Magistrate's Court's. I was in Court when One Father who wanted his 25 Year Old daughter to Move out into a Home of Her Own, ended up having an Intervention Order issued against Him By His Daughter, who had made Allegations against Her Father.The father Told Magistrate Greg McNamara that his Daughter's Intervention order was just a Frivolous Use Of an Intervention Order because she didn't want to Leave His Home, to which The Magistrate Replied, There are no Frivolous Orders issued By the Court.

I Would Definately Disagree, there are many people who misuse Intervention Orders. I have also seen a mother Crying in Court before a magistrate pleading with Him to at Least allow Her to Ring Her son. So Who is Going to Stop These Frivolous and Distorted Applications for Intervention Orders in Victorian Courts???. They are merely Trivial Disputes not associated at all with Family Violence.

There are More serious Problems associated with the lack of a proper  application of Intervention Orders. When a Magistrate Sentences Someone Who Breeches an Intervention Order To Jail. The Defendants are then Mixing with all Sorts of Criminals with access to all sorts of Firearms, When The Defendant is released, it would be a very easy process for the defendant to pick up a firearm from friends of Inmates they Met in Jail. There are No Checks by Police at all to make sure the Defendant has not obtained a Firearm to Shoot The Affected Family Member.

I sat in on a case involving a Taxi Driver who contested a Female workmate's Intervention Order Application, The Woman's application was rejected by The Magistrate, but it only took 4 Days for the Woman to apply for another Intervention Order at The Same Court aginst the Same Person. Once again The application went to another Contested Hearing.

I was at Heidelberg Magistrate's Court when  a defendant Contested an application for an Intervention Order for a second time, On Both Occassions the applicant failed to appear at court, it had cost the Defendant $3000 in Total to be represented at Both Hearings.

So why isn't this distortion of the Legal Process Stopped?????. Its Because their is no oversight by Court Staff, you simply make an application by filling in a form and away it Goes. These hearings have nothing to do with family Violence and are More Like The Jerry Springer Show.

No wonder there is a 48 Percent Increase in applications for Intervention Orders. Magistrate Ian Gray's Solution to the Problem is for the Government to spend more on court Resource's????. Are you Kidding!!!!.









 

Intervention Orders Versus Civil Liberties.

On The 15th August 2012, I walked Into Courtroom 4 In a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne. A Defendant was seeking A Variation to an Intervention Order Before Magistrate Len Brears.

The Defendant Told Magistrate Brears, Your honour I am seeking a Variation To an intervention Order that Prohibits me From Going To My Family Members Place Of employment. I Have To Travel with My work and My Family Members Place of Work is at Tullamarine Airport.

Well Magistrate Len Brears Said, The Laws are there to be used with Common Sense and I doubt that any Police Officer would Charge you For Breeching An intervention Order If You had a Legitimate Excuse To Be At The Airport.

From My Personal Experiences, What Magistrate Len Brears was Saying, Doesn't Necessarily Happen In The Real World, Intervention Orders can affect where People Shop, Swim Or Go To a Meeting even if you Have a Legitimate Reason To Be There. They can Seriously affect a Person's Civil Liberties On a day To day Basis, Outside The Theoretical world Of The Courtroom,  Here are a Number Of Examples Of What Really happens.

     A Defendant was in a Hurry in a large Melbourne Shopping Centre and Needed to Get a few Groceries Before going Home. His ex-Brother-in-law worked at The Store at Left which was Technically Covered by an Intervention Order, The Defendant asked The management Whether he could Get just a few Items From Their Store. Management told The Defendant that was OK,



The Defendant was in and Out of The store in 10 Minutes Around 12 noon On a Saturday Morning.There was no Criminal Intent by The Defendant, he just wanted to buy Some goods From The Store, But This was a Criminal offence by Virtue of The Intervention Order That was In Place In Victoria.

There was another Supermarket In The Same Shopping Complex, But that would also Be a Breech of an Intervention Order because Both stores are Run by The Same Company.

In Fact in This Case, Management told The Defendant's Ex Brother-in-law about The Defendant's Use of the supermarket,




The Police were Notified and The Defendant was Charged by Police For Breeching an Intervention Order.The Police Charge Sheet said, The So called Affected Family Member Felt Harassed & Intimidated By the defendant using The Supermarket,

The Charge was Completely Ridiculous, Because The defendant's Ex Brother-in-law worked at the Supermarket to Fill the Supermarket's Shelves Late at Night and Didn't actually work there during The day, so The So Called AFM was Not working in The Store at 12 Noon On A Saturday Morning at The time of the "Alleged Breech".of The Intervention Order.

 In another Intervention Order Case, The Defendant was a Member of a Club that had Scheduled a Special Meeting at a Meeting Room at The Local Council offices (Pictured Left). The Defendant was on The Committee of the Club and had Duties to perform During The meeting In cluding Taking a Video Of a Speech.





 The problem was the Committee had Invited Another Group That Included the Defendant's Ex Brother-in-law who had an Intervention Order against Him.The Defendant Rang The Local Police Station To Enquire, Who had a Legal right to Be at The Meeting as both the Defendant and his Ex Brother-in-law had Intervention Orders Against Each Other.

Well, The Police Officer  said we Would arrest You and Charge you if you Went to the Meeting, Because You are going to The meeting Knowing That Your Ex Brother-in-law Could be Going There too, which would be a Breech Of the Intervention Order.

The Defendant was Stunned to say The Least, The defendant had a Legitimate Reason to Be at the Meeting as he was a Committee Member, But The police Made it Very Clear that they Would arrest Him if he went to the meeting.

On One Visit To a Court In Melbourne, The Defendant asked Magistrate Greg McNamara To Clarify who had a Legal right To attend the meeting In this Type of Situation, To which The Magistrate Simply replied, If it was Me, I Wouldn't Be going. The Senior Magistrate has said From the Bench at this Same Court, That Intervention Order's are There to Provide Defendant's with Clear Boundaries as to what they can and Can't Do. The Defendant Left The Court None the Wiser in regards to his Legal Rights in Attending The Meeting.

You don't have to be a Young Thug Or Violent to be In This sort of Situation, An elderly Woman On a walker appeared Before Magistrate Marc Sargent Seeking a Variation to Her daughter's Intervention Order who worked for a Store that had Shop's in 2 Very Large Shopping Centres and a smaller Strip shopping store in Melbourne.

Your Honour, I need to seek Clarification as to Which Shopping Centre's I am allowed to attend, I have to be Able to shop Somewhere the Woman Pleaded,

Yes, it Needs to Be Clarified Replied The magistrate and adjourned The matter to a Return Date.

As I mentioned Earlier The variation Sought By A defendant before Magistrate Len Brears In Regards to Tullamarine Airport, resulted in The defendant Being able to attend Tullamarine Airport on Legitimate Business, But he will be Breeching The Intervention Order if He Fly's With a Particular Airline.


People should be able to attend Public Places without having to seek Clarification at a Magistrate;s Court on Intervention Orders that have Nothing to do with Family Violence at all.

The Majority of Intervention Orders In Victoria have an Exclusion Zone Of 200 Metres. The Defendant in This Case had been a Member of This Leisurecentre For over 10 Years, attending at Least 3 or 4 Times a week, But the Defendant's Ex mother-in-law rang Police Claiming that The defendant was Breeching The order Because The Far end of This Swimming Pool (Pictured Left) was within 200 Metres of her Back Fence.



So The defendant was Not Within 200 Metres at This End Of the Pool, But it was claimed He was at Some point at the Other end of the 50 Metre Lap Lanes.

The Defendant didn't want to Breech The Intervention Order so a Variation was sought to Vary The Order from 200 Metres, back to 150 Metres so that the Exclusion Zone Didn't Cover any part of The Leisurecentre.

The Application was heard by Victorian Magistrate Denise O'Reilly who handed this Decision Down.

The Leisurecentre is in fact within 200 metres, At least in part. Had the evidence been that you see them at the leisurecentre and leave immediately, then I might have made a different decision, but the fact is you see them and you don't leave. They end up leaving. Now they're the ones who have taken out the orders against you. They are not subject to orders. There is nothing that prevents them coming up to you and speaking to you, but you must not approach them. If they speak to you, you ought not be speaking to them, because they won't go to jail for speaking to you, but you will Go to jail if it can be construed that you have approached them, or that you have had a conversation which has preceded to develop into any behavior that could be called harassing or intimidating to them.

Maybe Magistrate O'Reilly Should read page 24 of the Book, responding to Intervention Orders, under the heading 'What does no contact mean" it says this. No Contact means no contact with the other person. It also means that the other person with the intervention order should not contact you. If the other person contacts you this could put them in Breech of the Order. So which interpretation is Right???. This illustrates the confusion that surrounds the interpretation of Intervention Orders in Victoria even by Magistrates.

This Interpretation of Victorian Intervention Order's By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly allowed the Defendant's Brother-in-law to take The Dispute one Step Further.

    The Defendant had Parked his Car To go to this Shopping Centre Pictured at Left, It was at Night and as The Defendant walked Towards the Shop's, His Ex Brother-in-law saw him and came Over and Blocked The Defendant Walking towards the Shop's by Standing 10 Metres in Front of Him.

The Defendant Kept on walking and as The Defendant got to the Right hand Side of the Supermarket His Ex Brother-in-law Followed him across to the Left Hand side of the Supermarket's Entrance.

At This Point The Defendant Turned around and Told his ex Brother-in-law to go away and Leave Him alone, in No uncertain Terms. Then The ex Brother-in-law Tried to Physically Grab The Defendant By The Arm and Said, Come on , I'm Taking you Over to the Police Station, Because you have Just Breeched My Intervention Order.

The Defendant decided it was time to also Seek an Intervention Order against his Ex-Brother-in-law Because Magistrate Denise O'Reilly's Decision allowed His Ex Brother-in-law to Approach Him and then claim it was the Defendant that had Breeched The Intervention Order, which could Lead to The Defendant Being Charged By Police.

The application was Heard By Magistrate Hugh Walter. The ex brother-in-law's Explanation of the Situation was Misleading and Quite different. Your honour The Ex Brother-in-law explained, I grabbed The Defendant by the Arm to stop Him Breeching The Intervention Order, Because he would Have been Breeching The order by entering the Supermarket, Which is My Place Of work.

Magistrate Hugh Walter asked the Defendant's Ex-brother-in-law how Long He Had worked at The supermarket. I have worked there for about a Month, Then I'll Go And Work at another Store For a Month and will Probably Return to work at this Supermarket again in a Few Months. The Defendants Barrister said to Magistrate Hugh Walter, how does my client supposed to know when his Ex Brother-in-Law is working at Which SuperMarket.??? Magistrate Hugh Walter agreed & Granted The Intervention Order against The ex- Brother-in-law Until Further order Because he had Tried to grab The Defendant By The Arm. At least the Defendant was now legally Equal with his Brother-in-Law in Terms of Breeching the Intervention Order.

What defendant's Don't Realize is that These type's of Intervention Order's can go on and On Like This for Years, and can affect your lifestyle Considerably, even What you consider to be your Normal Lifestyle can Become a Criminal offence simply By a Magistrate granting somebody an Intervention Order against you despite the Fact that Intervention Orders are Civil Dispute's, and you don't have to actually Harm anybody to have an Intervention Order issued against you. Once the Intervention Order is in Place, Anything can Happen, depending on a Magistrate Or police officer's interpretation Of the Law. As you have seen in These Examples.

Because your ex-in-law or relation has an Intervention Order against You In Victoria, they will then become Protected witnesses and any Time you seek To Vary Or Revoke the Intervention Order it will cost you a lot Of Money, because you Cannot Cross Examine the Other Person and you will be Forced to have Legal Representation at The Court. As Magistrate Max Cashmore said to One defendant, if You don't have Legal Representation then you Virtually have no Chance of winning the Case, even if you haven't seen your Relation or Ex-In-Law in many years, Magistrate's Such as Denise O'Reilly or Greg McNamara may not Consider your Evidence to Be " Changed Circumstances" and Deny Your Application because they might say that you are Simply Complying With the Intervention Order, which Doesn't constitute " Changed Circumstances"

An application Before Magistrate Marc Sargent to vary an Intervention order was denied, Despite The fact the Defendant had no Contact with His Ex-Brother-in-law in Nearly 8 Years,because The Magistrate Concluded that having the intervention Order Remain in Place, Created " No Impediment" To The Defendants Day to Day life. The applicant Didn't Have to Prove to the Court why the intervention Order Should Continue, The Defendant had to Prove to the Court why the order should End.

On the 15th August 2012, I Left Magistrate Len Brears Court and Headed Downstairs to Courtroom 8. In the witness Box was a Young Woman who was applying for an Interim Intervention Order against Her Husband, She was Quite Upset.

I am very concerned about the Safety of My Children the Woman Said, My Husband has The children and he has Been assessed by a CAT Team as Being Suicidal and I Believe he may also harm The Children too. The Magistrate adjourned The matter to a Final Intervention Order Hearing on a Future Date,

As I Have said Before, The intervention order Process is not really a Protection System, Lets hope The Husband Does Not Become Suicidal Before The Next Hearing Date by The Court.