To: KAMALA HARRIS, SENATOR OF CALIFORNIA, Diane Feinstein, Senator of California, The California State House, The California State Senate, Governor Gavin Newsom, The United States House of Representatives, The United States Senate, and Presi...
California Domestic Violence Act should be voided for vagueness is overbroad and violates the Con...
The intention of this petition is so that Men get equal protection relative to the VAWA2013 and California DVPA, equal to that of women. That Civil and Criminal Orders and elements get separated and that the Court acknowledge that the intent of the Act be removed as an element, this biases all cases against men. You do not stop a man from murdering by executing him before possibly murdering someone in the future.
Why is this important?
Yes, my girlfriend found out I was infaithful to her and used the Courts to issue a Domestic Violence Restraining Order against me, for disturbing her peace. The Order takes away the freedom of men, without the use of their Constitutional Rights, they take a real Batterer, like Oj Simpson, who terrorized hios wife Nicole, and then murdered her , Then on National Television, got off on the charges when everyone knew he was guilty .The Government vowed to never let this happen again.
Our Government via Joe Biden, enacted the WAWA 1994, that is the best protection a woman could ever want; unfortunately it strips all rights of men who may just have an argument with their wife , she can run down, to the family Court fill an affidavit, DV109, 100, 120, 110, 130 the CLETS form, these forms present a primae facie Case to the Court( if unopposed it would prevail on the allegations of abuse), whetheer they are true or not. The fact that a Woman goes through the trouble of filling out the forms, is sufficient for these Courts to implement the intent of the Act , which is to prevent a battered woman from returning to continuuing abuse. All men have Domocles Sword hanging over their head, with these disparate laws, referred to in California Family Code 6200 et, seq. Section 6320 are the elements of this section ranging from disturbing the peace of another, verbal abuse, harassment and then ranging up to Physical Battering and Rape of the victim. The Courts and our Representatives have conveniently, put all these separate categories in to one section for ease of conviction of not a real batterer, but it could be a normal fight between a husband and wife, anbd the wife if she knows what to do , can get more than even with her husband for disturbing her peace. The Courts required to enforce the intention of the DVPA, even if sacrifices the freedom of all men, the motto is better a man sacrifificed than woman hurt. Most of this bombast is about future abuse, that might happen again, and the Courts are mandated to searate the parties 1-10 years, with a restraining order agaisnt the man( they really FEIGN that it is for the protection of men, that is bolderdash. IT PROTECTS WOMEN ONLY You have to distinguish between the Civil DVRO and the Criminal DVRO, they are basically the same except the Criminal guy (with criminal procedure rights) beats his wife brutally and gets the same DVRO as the Civil guy, who may have just lost a verbal argument to his wrathful wife who looks for vindication form the Courts who are happy to pass out DVROs against men,(without criminal procedure rights) its their legislative order and mandate that they do so. The real fabrications are in the statistics they cite about DV, they are as Trump states, alternative facts. The Act is a money make for the Government, both Federal and State , benefits, therapy groups, and if was put on NASDAQ, it would be a winning investment for the investor. The take home message is not that Domestic Violence should not be stopped, because it should but the way the law is written is void for vagueness, overbroad, and violates the over breadth doctrine of the Constitution, it needs to be re written to conform to the Constitution of the United States and the Human Rights Commision of 1948. It is not for the greater good as some believe( you cannot suspend a man criminal procedure and make it Civil for ease of conviction of the accused, and further the sacrifice of one innocent man and his freedom so a woman can be saved is not equal protection under the 14 th amendment. Please rewrite the VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMAN ACT 2013, AND THE CALIFORNIA DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT SO THAT MEN ARE PROTECTED FULLY COMPLETELY AND CONSTITUIONALLY UNDER THE LAW . Not utilizing the intent of preventing future abuse as Standard for issuing a DVRO. PLEASE DO NOT EXTEND THE VAWA AFTER IT EXPIRES IN 2018, REWRITE THIS ACT AND THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, SO THAT PEOPLE DO NOT PROFIT FROM IT, SO THAT IT PROTECTS WOMEN WITHOUT SACRIFICING INNOCENT MEN. LONG LIVE THE INTENT OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS AS IT APPLIES TO THIS ISSUE.
Our Government via Joe Biden, enacted the WAWA 1994, that is the best protection a woman could ever want; unfortunately it strips all rights of men who may just have an argument with their wife , she can run down, to the family Court fill an affidavit, DV109, 100, 120, 110, 130 the CLETS form, these forms present a primae facie Case to the Court( if unopposed it would prevail on the allegations of abuse), whetheer they are true or not. The fact that a Woman goes through the trouble of filling out the forms, is sufficient for these Courts to implement the intent of the Act , which is to prevent a battered woman from returning to continuuing abuse. All men have Domocles Sword hanging over their head, with these disparate laws, referred to in California Family Code 6200 et, seq. Section 6320 are the elements of this section ranging from disturbing the peace of another, verbal abuse, harassment and then ranging up to Physical Battering and Rape of the victim. The Courts and our Representatives have conveniently, put all these separate categories in to one section for ease of conviction of not a real batterer, but it could be a normal fight between a husband and wife, anbd the wife if she knows what to do , can get more than even with her husband for disturbing her peace. The Courts required to enforce the intention of the DVPA, even if sacrifices the freedom of all men, the motto is better a man sacrifificed than woman hurt. Most of this bombast is about future abuse, that might happen again, and the Courts are mandated to searate the parties 1-10 years, with a restraining order agaisnt the man( they really FEIGN that it is for the protection of men, that is bolderdash. IT PROTECTS WOMEN ONLY You have to distinguish between the Civil DVRO and the Criminal DVRO, they are basically the same except the Criminal guy (with criminal procedure rights) beats his wife brutally and gets the same DVRO as the Civil guy, who may have just lost a verbal argument to his wrathful wife who looks for vindication form the Courts who are happy to pass out DVROs against men,(without criminal procedure rights) its their legislative order and mandate that they do so. The real fabrications are in the statistics they cite about DV, they are as Trump states, alternative facts. The Act is a money make for the Government, both Federal and State , benefits, therapy groups, and if was put on NASDAQ, it would be a winning investment for the investor. The take home message is not that Domestic Violence should not be stopped, because it should but the way the law is written is void for vagueness, overbroad, and violates the over breadth doctrine of the Constitution, it needs to be re written to conform to the Constitution of the United States and the Human Rights Commision of 1948. It is not for the greater good as some believe( you cannot suspend a man criminal procedure and make it Civil for ease of conviction of the accused, and further the sacrifice of one innocent man and his freedom so a woman can be saved is not equal protection under the 14 th amendment. Please rewrite the VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMAN ACT 2013, AND THE CALIFORNIA DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT SO THAT MEN ARE PROTECTED FULLY COMPLETELY AND CONSTITUIONALLY UNDER THE LAW . Not utilizing the intent of preventing future abuse as Standard for issuing a DVRO. PLEASE DO NOT EXTEND THE VAWA AFTER IT EXPIRES IN 2018, REWRITE THIS ACT AND THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, SO THAT PEOPLE DO NOT PROFIT FROM IT, SO THAT IT PROTECTS WOMEN WITHOUT SACRIFICING INNOCENT MEN. LONG LIVE THE INTENT OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS AS IT APPLIES TO THIS ISSUE.