reply to post by Cobaltic1978
I don't know how it is in the UK, but, in the US it has nothing to do with what the Court Order tells you to do or not to do. They may give any
arbitrary instruction, ludicrous or not, say to pay X amount of dollars--even if you shouldn't have to pay X amount of dollars; X amount of dollars is
unfair or X amount was not the amount ordered in similar cases. (You can challenge the instruction to pay X amount of dollars, but, X amount is
determined by a formula you have a right to rebut, but, not allowed to know what the formula is you are rebutting --making it impossible to rebut X
amount of dollars at the time the order is made. And, so it is with the gag order, one may not know the situation that allows it to argue against it
at the time the order is made.) It is about the Order, itself. You are punished for violating the order, not for violating the instruction. It's just
that violating the instruction is violating the order and so it appears as though you are being punished for violating the instruction. Law is precise
in it's language and akin to a state of madness. He is likely being jailed for violating the order, the violation just happens to be publicly naming
For instance, in Washington State, USA (paraphrasing RCW 26.50.110 apps.leg.wa.gov...
Whenever an order
is granted or there is a valid foreign protection order
and the respondent or person to be restrained knows of the
, a violation of any of the following provisions of the order
is a gross misdemeanor except in certain conditions and, among other
things, a violation of an order
issued shall also constitute contempt of court, and is subject to the penalties prescribed by law.
You get misdemeanor charges and contempt of court for violating the order, not for violating the provisions.
While the closed family court hearing is, technically, a secret, in that it is a publicly closed proceeding and the records are not public, that may
not remain the case for long. The US has begun to open some of the family court proceedings to the public, though, it is still at the judge's
discretion (say, in sexual abuse cases) and the records are still closed to the public. Maybe, the trend will catch on in the UK. The problem with
family courts is that it is an administrative hearing and not a trial (to see the difference read
) and, secondly, family courts do not make decisions
based on the precedents of similar decisions en.wikipedia.org...
but, according to judicial discretion.
The hearing was likely only on whether the order was violated, not whether the provision was legal or lawful. (And, being at the judge's discretion,
it probably was, plus, the judge would just say they are not "here to retry the order.")
As for lack of counsel, this may explain:
In agency adjudication, the constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel does not arise. However, parties are permitted to be advised and
represented by counsel at the party’s own expense. Denial of right to counsel may result in the setting aside of an agency decision. Rehearing is
allowed on setting aside of agency decision on the ground of denial of right to counsel. However, a party is at liberty to waive his/her statutory
right to counsel. Failure to obtain representation by counsel will not affect the need to exhaust administrative remedy.
Maybe, the system needs an overhaul.
Note: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice and I did not read the article before giving my opinion.
edit on 2-6-2013 by PhyberDragon1