So if an EPO is issued for a stalker, the stalker is going to stop because of it? That's what you're implying above.

 

I agree that a protection order isn't going to stop a lunatic hellbent on shooting someone like this loser. But, I also don't see any reason that it's going to stop a stalker or anyone else for that matter as you eluded. It's essentially a piece of paper.

 

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what the use of them is, if as you've pretty much implied, they're essentially useless.

 

If someone is stalking you and you have an EPO against the stalker, when you see that person stalking you, you call the police. They come arrest the stalker and put that person in jail for violating the EPO. If the stalker gets out and does it again, the stalker ends up in jail again, this time for a much longer time. If the stalker is in jail, he/she can't be stalking you and the EPO serves it's purpose.

 

And whether you want to believe it or not, some stalkers when slapped with a court order to stop stalking, do stop stalking.

 

And for the love of Pete, I've never implied that EPOs are essentially useless. To the contrary I've stated that the can be useful in certain limited circumstances. How is that implying that they are essentially useless?

So if an EPO is issued for a stalker, the stalker is going to stop because of it? That's what you're implying above.

 

I agree that a protection order isn't going to stop a lunatic hellbent on shooting someone like this loser. But, I also don't see any reason that it's going to stop a stalker or anyone else for that matter as you eluded. It's essentially a piece of paper.

 

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what the use of them is, if as you've pretty much implied, they're essentially useless.

 

How about this: If you have an EPO against someone and you notice them following you or hanging around near your home or work you can call the police and have them removed and/or arrested. If there were no EPO the police wouldn't really have any authority to detain them or have them removed from the area. Although they don't prevent anyone from phyisically assaulting anyone they do give the police the ability to make them go away. Also, if I'm not mistaken--and I frequently am, I think if they do assault/attack the person that obtained the EPO they face additional charges.

How about this: If you have an EPO against someone and you notice them following you or hanging around near your home or work you can call the police and have them removed and/or arrested. If there were no EPO the police wouldn't really have any authority to detain them or have them removed from the area. Although they don't prevent anyone from phyisically assaulting anyone they do give the police the ability to make them go away. Also, if I'm not mistaken--and I frequently am, I think if they do assault/attack the person that obtained the EPO they face additional charges.

 

And while I am dailing 911 to get the cops there to do something, he shoots me dead, that EPO really worked didnt it.

Sometimes EPOs work; sometimes they don't. It depends on how crazy and determined the individual is. People should not rely on the court system/police to protect them if they really feel that their lives are in danger. My advice is to get a gun, learn how to use it, keep it with you and shoot that crazy and determined individual until he/she is dead. If this woman had a gun, maybe the outcome would have been different; maybe not but at least it would have been a fair fight. I pray for this woman's recovery, both physically and mentally.

And while I am dailing 911 to get the cops there to do something, he shoots me dead, that EPO really worked didnt it.

 

Did you read my post? I didn't say it would do anything for someone that wanted to do physical harm to you. It would give the police the authority to remove someone who was following or harassing you. Otherwise, as long as they were in a public place they could follow you around anywhere and the police would have no authority to remove them. Just curious, how many EPOs do you think are issued each year vs how many people are attacked by the person that the EPO was issued against? They do prevent a lot of problems when the person causing the problem isn't committed to trying to hurt the person that obtains them. They are just a tool, not a fail safe.

 

So if an EPO is issued for a stalker, the stalker is going to stop because of it? That's what you're implying above.

 

I agree that a protection order isn't going to stop a lunatic hellbent on shooting someone like this loser. But, I also don't see any reason that it's going to stop a stalker or anyone else for that matter as you eluded. It's essentially a piece of paper.

 

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what the use of them is, if as you've pretty much implied, they're essentially useless.

 

No but a stalker can be arrested by simply being within a certain amount of feet of the person who obtained the EPO against them. They then go to jail and the stalking is over for the time being.

 

An EPO is good for men/women who are afraid and want to keep their husband/wife away. For example, say the two are getting divorced but the husband wants to show up and argue constantly and even comes close or actually does become violent. Once an EPO is obtained say the husband continues to harass in person or over the phone and makes threats. A phone call alone is enough for police to arrest that person for a violation of the EPO.

Reports this morning are encouraging for her recovery. That's certainly good news.

As to suing anyone, how can she recover financially for this? She can't, can she, since it was her husband who did this? Generally, I believe, you can recover from the estate of the shooter for damages and the like. However, here, she is going to inherit the estate.

You can't sue the judge for making a reasonable decision (assuming that it was) based on the facts presented before the court. Even then, the death was going to happen regardless of what that judge decided. Very sad all the way around.

The judge who denied the order is a close friend. I think she is a great person with a huge heart. I know nothing about how she rules from the bench, how her peers view her or even if she is a viewed as a quality judge, but from what I know of her she is the kind of person you would want as family court judge. She has a huge heart and cares about people. With that said I am sure she is troubled by the events of yesterday and wondering if her actions should have been different. No one can predict the future and I am sure she made the best decision with the known facts.

I think the point of the post that kind of triggered this whole discussion was...there seems to me a ton of evidence after the fact that there was definite reason for an EPO to be given. I mean, what's crazier that a guy pulling into his wife's place of work, shooting her 4 times then killing himself? And I'm sure the guy exhibited signs well before this event, which is why she went to the courts to start with. However, as stated many times already, that EPO would have not stopped him from what he did, but what he did sure showed that there was reason for an EPO to have existed.

Suddenly, this hit closer to home. Just found out that this woman's parents own Mr. Herb's restaurant. Their younger daughter goes to Brossart and used to play basketball with my daughter. Very nice family. I continue to pray for everyone affected by this tragedy.

The issue with EPO's, like so many other things, is that they are manipulated by people for the wrong reasons (custody disputes, revenege, etc) which leave those who truly need them in a place where the burden of proof is just that - a burden. This woman knew her husband, saw the escalation obviously, believed she was in danger and could not be protected - even on paper - because Jane Doe is trying to stick it to her ex before they go to court for custody of Jr. and Little Susie X 100 every day. No, the paper wouldn't stop the bullets, but if her employer knows she has an EPO and his car is in the lot, the can call the police for that. Lots of employers are becoming more proactive in these matters.

Thank you PSJ, for adding a little common sense!

No but a stalker can be arrested by simply being within a certain amount of feet of the person who obtained the EPO against them. They then go to jail and the stalking is over for the time being.

 

An EPO is good for men/women who are afraid and want to keep their husband/wife away. For example, say the two are getting divorced but the husband wants to show up and argue constantly and even comes close or actually does become violent. Once an EPO is obtained say the husband continues to harass in person or over the phone and makes threats. A phone call alone is enough for police to arrest that person for a violation of the EPO.

Exactly!! I was speaking to a lawyer friend of mine last night, and these (and some mentioned above) were reasons why an EPO is important and can be useful...even in cases like this one.

An EPO can indeed be a very useful tool, but as AverageJoesGym said, they're not a fail safe. You simply can not regulate a sick mind. A stack of restraining orders a mile high wouldn't have kept this guy from shooting his estranged wife.

An EPO is only going to make a nutcase more upset.