Slander Submitted to a Court

[not2cleverRed]

Another thing this court did was state the expiration date for the harassment order in twelve days, but the docket I requested yesterday shows that the expiration date was scratched out with a pen, and a new date was scribbled in with a pen. No one notified me about this. The new date shows an expiration date of almost two years from now. Why didn't anyone notify me about this? Why was the original date scribbled out? Had I not contacted the court yesterday requesting the docket, I wouldn't have known about the new date of expiration.

I'm willing to bet that when you were served the initial order that you ignored the information about the hearing where the order was finalized. I suspect that you were properly served.

You are focusing on the wrong thing: the first step would have been to figure out how to fight the order. And yes, your options are different depending on the state.

You have no case because not responding means that you didn't contest/contradict her allegations.

You have put the cart before the horse.

 

[quincy]

It might be time for Razzbo to reflect on what role s/he played that led to a harassment order being granted. These orders rarely come out of nowhere.

 

[stealth2]

What is the name of your state? California

Hello, a female acquaintance of mine submitted numerous defamatory accusations of me to a court, failed to give proof, but the court accepted the claims anyway. This is astonishing in itself. There is now a false Harassment order against me. Since the woman lied (under penalty of perjury), and my image is now tarnished, what are my legal options? I think she just manipulated the court with her American sense of white female, privilege entitlement. Our society is so sick today. A white woman can just walk into a court and lie through her teeth and get away with it, and the court accepts her claims, even though absolutely no proof for the claims were provided. I demand justice and accountability. If possible, I only want professional legal information from a lawyer, not just anyone's subjective and ill-informed opinions. Thanks. I have found that most people have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to law, human rights and religion.

Of course, people of all genders and races lie.

ITA that you were likely served, ignored it, and are now unhappy that the acquaintance won by default. Oh well. I, too, suspect that there is more to this story than you're letting on.

p.s. If you don't like Razzbo as a userID, why did you choose it?

 

[adjusterjack]

limiting or eliminating the use of social media probably would be smart.

Right. Social media is often how these p-issing contests start and escalate.

I, too, would be curious as to the other side of the story. There always is one.

 

[Razzbo]

I'm willing to bet that when you were served the initial order that you ignored the information about the hearing where the order was finalized. I suspect that you were properly served.

Wrong on all counts. You said you are willing to bet. How much? And where did you get these erroneous ideas from? I was served through an email and it wasn't even signed by a judicial officer. Further, I wasn't given the option to appear.

You are focusing on the wrong thing: the first step would have been to figure out how to fight the order. And yes, your options are different depending on the state.

I did. Instead of taking it into my own hands I consulted with a lawyer. We are fighting it now.

You have no case because not responding means that you didn't contest/contradict her allegations.

Actually, I do have a case. You are not my lawyer and not in posession of all the details. I wasn't given the option to respond. Nothing on the document invited me to appear and contest. I did the right thing and immediately consulted with a lawyer.

 

[Razzbo]

The next time I respond here will be when this case is over. I'll explain exactly what happened with relevant details. And there actually is a penalty for perjury. I counted exactly ten lies about me which this woman submitted to the court under penalty of perjury. It is very easy to refute the lies.

[video removed]

 

[quincy]

Wrong on all counts. You said you are willing to bet. How much? And where did you get these erroneous ideas from? I was served through an email and it wasn't even signed by a judicial officer. Further, I wasn't given the option to appear.



I did. Instead of taking it into my own hands I consulted with a lawyer. We are fighting it now.



Actually, I do have a case. You are not my lawyer and not in posession of all the details. I wasn't given the option to respond. Nothing on the document invited me to appear and contest. I did the right thing and immediately consulted with a lawyer.

Your post with the video was reported for moderator review. Most of us on this forum know what perjury is without the video lesson.

I am happy to hear that you have consulted with an attorney in your area. Good luck.

 

[Razzbo]

Update here. I caught the woman in more lies in the oral transcript, which I ordered online. There are numerous lies in the affidavit and in the audio recording. My lawyer thinks this woman has mental health issues. This whole thing will be quashed very soon. It amazes me that a person could raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth, then lie through her or his teeth, with no fear of the penalty for perjury. It's also very disappointing that a judge could accept hearsay claims without requiring a shred of evidence. This woman lied about things which are of a material nature. She's going to be in a boat load of legal trouble.

 

[Razzbo]

Oh, so video links aren't allowed here? Was the video removed because it violates guidelines, or because people already know what the penalty for perjury is?

 

[Zigner]

It's also very disappointing that a judge could accept hearsay claims without requiring a shred of evidence.

Please study up on what "hearsay" and "evidence" actually are. Her direct testimony is not hearsay and definitely is evidence.

 

[stealth2]

Is there a way to change my user name? I don't particularly care for it.

I'm still waiting for the new choice...

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I'm still waiting for the new choice...

Why? You have no say in what the user's name is.

 

[quincy]

Oh, so video links aren't allowed here? Was the video removed because it violates guidelines, or because people already know what the penalty for perjury is?

Most video links, and commercial links (which include links to attorney websites) are not permitted on this forum.

In addition, most of the regular forum members know what perjury is and do not need a video lesson on perjury. As I said earlier, the time to address lies told in court will be in court. Perjury is rarely charged. And lies told during the course of a court proceeding are covered by an absolute privilege and cannot form the basis of a civil action.

 

[Taxing Matters]

It's also very disappointing that a judge could accept hearsay claims without requiring a shred of evidence.

Two things about hearsay you need to know. First, understand what the term "hearsay" means in evidence law. Simplifying it a bit, hearsay evidence is trying to get a statement made outside of court admitted as evidence. Hearsay evidence is not admissible unless one of the hearsay exceptions apply (and there are quite a few exceptions). For example, suppose John testifies that "Peter told me the fence repairs would be completed by November 16". Here, it is Peter's out of court statement about when the fence repairs would be done that is potentially hearsay, not John's court testimony.

The second thing to know is that generally to get the evidence excluded the opposing party needs to timely raise the hearsay objection to give the party offering the statement the opportunity to explain why it is not hearsay or to explain what exception applies to allow the statement to be admitted. So if there was truly hearsay evidence offered that you wanted kept out, your lawyer needed to make the proper objection.

 

[Zigner]

The second thing to know is that generally to get the evidence excluded the opposing party needs to timely raise the hearsay objection to give the party offering the statement the opportunity to explain why it is not hearsay or to explain what exception applies to allow the statement to be admitted. So if there was truly hearsay evidence offered that you wanted kept out, your lawyer needed to make the proper objection.

Just a note on this: The initial hearing in CA relating to a "restraining order" is often ex parte (although the other party can attend). At that initial hearing, if the judge feels it is proper, s/he will issue a temporary order for a short period of time (12 days in the OP's case) and set a hearing for the "permanent" order. Apparently, the OP missed the initial hearing and the final hearing. It's possible that the OP wasn't properly served.