What evidence is allowed?

[quincy]

If your question is only "what evidence is allowed in a hearing," it depends. Text messages, phone calls, witness testimony, police reports and activity .. anything is possible. Authentication of evidence may be simple or complex depending on any challenges made on the authenticity.

Your son needs to speak to his attorney or perhaps you can help him pay for a private attorney.

 

[darcyjo64]

If your question is only "what evidence is allowed in a hearing," it depends. Text messages, phone calls, witness testimony, police reports and activity .. anything is possible. Authentication of evidence may be simple or complex depending on any challenges made on the authenticity.

Your son needs to speak to his attorney or perhaps you can help him pay for a private attorney.

So, if I understand you correctly, a witness along with the threats they have rec'd is more likely to be admissible, whereas just copies of these messages without the corroborating witness is probably just considered hearsay?

 

[quincy]

So, if I understand you correctly, a witness along with the threats they have rec'd is more likely to be admissible, whereas just copies of these messages without the corroborating witness is probably just considered hearsay?

That sounds correct.

 

[not2cleverRed]

No offense, but even my ex husband could probably get my passwords if he wanted. All you have to do is get the security questions right. As far as shutting off all connections, he has done that before but it's his only way to have contact with his daughter. She lives 2 hours away.
Since the Ppo was made to stand, she hasn't attempted contact. That's almost scarier than the last 10 months of continuous threats, etc...Like waiting for the ball to drop.

Shadowbunny gave you sound advice.

Follow it: use answers to security questions that are a little false.

 

[darcyjo64]

That sounds correct.

Thank you! That makes more sense. His attorney was so dismissive, almost like he was bothering her whenever he tried to ask a question!

 

[quincy]

Here are links to the Michigan Legal Help organization, with information on what happens when a personal protection order is violated and how to enforce the order:

https://michiganlegalhelp.org/self-help-tools/personal-safety/what-happens-if-you-violate-personal-protection-order

https://michiganlegalhelp.org/self-help-tools/personal-safety/personal-protection-order-violations-and-enforcement

 

[darcyjo64]

Here are links to the Michigan Legal Help organization, with information on what happens when a personal protection order is violated and how to enforce the order:

https://michiganlegalhelp.org/self-help-tools/personal-safety/what-happens-if-you-violate-personal-protection-order

https://michiganlegalhelp.org/self-help-tools/personal-safety/personal-protection-order-violations-and-enforcement

Thank you!

 

[quincy]

Thank you!

You're welcome, darcyjo64. We all appreciate the thanks.

I hope your son's life gets less complicated soon. Good luck.

 

[Taxing Matters]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

Domestic violence case. Female alleges assault. No contact order in place. Female continues to stalk male. Fake emails, numerous facebook pages, different phone numbers. Male has blocked them all. Female makes constant threats to violate his bond unless he unblocks her, or begs him to unblock and claims she won't violate him. Male got a Ppo against the female. When we tried to present this stalking evidence to his court appointed attorney, she said it would do no good. The only thing she is interested in is her perjuring herself during the Ppo hearing in regards to the case. The case was hardly discussed during the Ppo hearing. She did admit under oath that she has his passwords to his emails and facebook. Why wouldn't this be allowed? Doesn't this show her questionable character? There's a lot more to the story, including her harassment of family, friends, acquaintances, etc. as well as threatening his daughter.

If you are asking what evidence is allowed in the domestic violence case, the basic answer is that any admissible evidence that is relevant to the issue before the court. In the domestic violence case, the issue before the court is whether he committed the alleged violence against the victim. So the only evidence relevant to that issue are those things that bear on the issue of whether he committed that act, i.e. evidence tending to prove or disprove what happened that day. Therein lies the problem with wanting to use all the stuff that the girlfriend has done afterwards. How does any of that help prove or disprove what he did in the alleged domestic violence incident? It really doesn't, which is likely why his attorney is not interested in it. Evidence as to character of the accused or witnesses is generally not admissible except for evidence that tends to prove whether the person is truthful or not. Attacking the witness' character for truthfulness is allowed, which is why the attorney was interested in the perjury the victim/witness committed in the prior hearing.

 

[Taxing Matters]

So, if I understand you correctly, a witness along with the threats they have rec'd is more likely to be admissible, whereas just copies of these messages without the corroborating witness is probably just considered hearsay?

The legal definition of hearsay is a bit different than the way most nonlawyers use the term, and probably not worth going into here. The need for the witness along with the messages goes to the issue of authentication — the court needs to have someone verify that the e-mails, etc., are authentic. But the evidence your son seeks to present must still be relevant to the issue before the court, which means it needs to be something that helps prove or disprove what happened in that alleged domestic violence incident, or evidence that bears on the truthfulness of the state's witnesses (e.g. the victim). Evidence as to perjury by the victim in the prior hearing would be great to use, but evidence that she has been accessing his e-mails, etc, since then is really not relevant and thus would be why his attorney isn't interested in that stuff.