Ditto...
The PFA was issued two days ago on Friday. It does not take effect until AFTER he is served. If he not was served notice prior to texting her, then he should not have been arrested. If he was served and he violated the order, then he messed up for texting her.
Reviewing
gatherk's threads does not give me the warm fuzzies this is being properly handled. The only information stated was that allegations were made based upon an instance of bruising on the child, both the police and CPS investigated, and the case is being closed. There was no mention of any charges filed or that a finding of abuse was made.
Beyond that is a desire to not allow the father to have joint custody, and that he have supervised visitations. And it was noted the father allegedly hit her
"in the past".
On the face of this, there does not appear to be sufficient basis to file for an emergency order of protection.
However, it was suggested here she run right out and get a PFA, in the implied context of a preemptive strategy and setting up a 'papertrail', which was done on Friday. As most know, getting a temporary protective order is much to easy. But proving it up at an evidentiary hearing is another matter entirely.
If a permanent PFA is denied, and there is any feeling by the court this was improperly requested, this could backfire on mom.
If a PFA is warranted, then that is fine and dandy. But so far this post has raised some questions on whether it really is warranted...