When an AVO is just a tactic in a lovers’ quarrel

Eric says:

07:40am | 19/08/09

This sort of thing happens a lot more than many people like to think. It’s one of the ways our society discriminates against men—by empowering women to use false complaints as weapons.

AVOs and false claims of rape are more common than the media would like to pretend. The rape claim that destroyed Theo Theophanous’ career has received only a fraction of the coverage that has been given to NRL scandals or others where men can be portrayed as the bad guys.

It would be good to live in a society where both sexes were equal before the law. Unfortunately, men are second class citizens when it comes to the courts.

Eric says:

07:45am | 19/08/09

P.S. The real victim in this particular case is the boyfriend. If he was a living with Blondie, he would effectively have been evicted from his home with no notice and no opportunity to collect his things.

However, there seems little sympathy for the victim in this article. My advice to him would be to drop the woman straight away and never see her again. This was a form of domestic abuse. If she did it once, she’ll do it again.

Lexi says:

08:03am | 19/08/09

It’s drawing a low bow to say Blondie definitely used the “AVO” to “punish” her BF.  Or that’s she is even slightly representative of any other women who have orders taken out on their behalf for their protection. This, from my previous experience sitting in the press box of local court is less common than you are making out.  They are not called AVOs anymore, either - they are ADVOs - Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders.

Most common is the women who are in fear, who the police seek to protect with ADVOs.  The women who then receive all the promises from their man that it will never happen again. The women who have suffered years of beling told that it was their fault - they “made” him do it; they “deserved” it.

These women have rock bottom self esteem and believe that the man who hurts them is also the only man who’ll love them.  Often, these women mistakenly believe going back is what’s “best for the kids”.

They try to remove the ADVO in order to try to (often mistakenly) repair what’s left of their relationship, their family.  They need more support in order to pursue a life without abuse - not stereotypes created to paint them as troublemakers and wanna-be victims.

eag says:

08:08am | 19/08/09

Hmm!!!So women are to blame here for taking desparate measures when things get out of control.No women whatever she does is to blame for violence directed at her.Not acceptable in any circumstances.We live in a society where women sometimes do play the victim to get heard,to get their problem recognised and to get help because they don’t know what else to do or how else to be.Yes, it ‘wastes’ busy clerks time if you look at it in this hard-nosed blaming way.Let she who casts the first stone etc….

Eric says:

08:23am | 19/08/09

eag—so you say “Blondie” was lying when she said she wasn’t really threatened? If she was lying then, why not when she requested the AVO?

Please try to learn something about domestic violence before displaying your sexism. Here’s a start: http://www.mediaradar.org/media_fact_sheet.php

Hopium says:

08:44am | 19/08/09

And to think, they wouldn’t give a PVO to protect my brother when he was being stalked and constantly threatened.

We ended up having to constantly protect him.

If it happened to a female, she would have had a PVO to protect her immediately.

RT says:

08:49am | 19/08/09

There was ‘only a slim possibility’ that she was a genuine victim, Lisa? And you could tell this by a overhearing to a few seconds of conversation from a complete stranger? Maybe the AVO was false but maybe it was real and she decided to withdraw it because of pressure from her man and her own insecurity. That happens, too. The point is that you have a view about AVOs but the using this flimsy evidence to support it doesn’t cut it.

Eric, you’re also being presumptuous in saying ‘the real victim is the boyfriend’. Unless you personally know this couple and intimate details about their relationship, you have no way at all of knowing who the real victim is. Instead,  your own anti-feminist agenda gets another run here. Do you know the meaning of the words ‘balance’, ‘reserving judgement until the facts are known’ etc? I doubt it.

Kylie says:

08:55am | 19/08/09

Lisa, as you said yourself, you don’t know why they fought.. Then you’ve made further assumptions about the event based on “Blondie’s” appearance and also, you used the word victimisation in your final paragraph. Victimisation would be what you’ve just done to these ladies by persecuting them in the media. Clearly you haven’t researched your subjects. 

As far as AVO’s go. She clearly felt she needed protection at the time and it would have been her perspective on the situation which mattered in issuing an AVO to begin with. At least she took the initiative to explain herself to the court (no matter how thin the explanation) and cancel it.

Writer sounds like she’s being a bit of a victim herself. Wait your turn in line and stop evesdropping on other people’s private matters.

Eric says:

09:11am | 19/08/09

RT, once again you indulge in the very behaviour you criticise.

Lisa was there, and saw “Blondie” admitting her fabrication. Yet your anti-male bias leads you to defend the false accuser, and accuse the real victim.

Methinks you are the one who needs to find some balance.

Simmo says:

09:11am | 19/08/09

My son is in grade 4 at school and his little girlfriend thinks it’s cute and fun to punch him in the arm all the time, the teachers say nothing to her about it as they expect a boy can cope with a girl punching him in the arm all the time.

However, if he was to even give her the littlest tap on the arm, he would be in the Principals office , suspended for a week and have to attend 6 months worth of anger management counselling.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with the views in the article but my example of what can happen to a 9 year old provides a bit of perspective on the massive gap in violence related issues between the genders….

Tim says:

09:13am | 19/08/09

Comments by RT and Eag above show part of the problem we have in society in regards to this issue.
The reason that some women can get away with using this tactic of playing the victim is because of society’s automatic assumption that women are less violent and meek compared with men who are always more violent and agressive. Objectivity of facts are rarely considered.
Women who claim AVO’s falsely ruin the system for the real victims who are being hurt

RT says:

09:22am | 19/08/09

It’s a little hard to explain things to you Eric, but I’ll try one last time. For your benefit, also, Tim: 1. maybe Blondie put in a false and malicious AVO and decided to withdraw it in a moment of sanity as Lisa concludes 2. maybe Blondie felt in genuine fear when she applied for the AVO and withdrew it under pressure from her man and/or because of her own insecurity about her relationship. I have concluded either is possible. You have concluded on the basis of flimsy evidence and your own prejudice that only one is possible. That’s the action of a bigot.

miles says:

09:25am | 19/08/09

real or not..isn’t it better that we take these things very seriously?
both to deter frivolous claims and give some small amount of power back to those very real victims of abuse..of either gender

Claire says:

09:36am | 19/08/09

Please do not trivialise domestic violence or the effect it has on women’s self esteem through under-researched opinion pieces.

In my personal experience it is not easy to get an AVO. At age 19, I repeatedly complained to the police about an ex-boyfriend of mine who had continued to stalk me 6 months after I ended the relationship. I finally got an AVO - after I ended up in hospital with facial injuries after being assaulted.

Luckily I have a strong support network, loving family an education and self-respect, so I pressed charges, followed through and went to trial seeking a conviction. However, many young women in my position simply do not have the self-esteem to do so. They believe irrationally that they ‘deserve it,’ and do not seek reparations.

Tim says:

09:49am | 19/08/09

RT,
that was my point.
However, do you see that kind of objectivity in the real world or in the media when women are often considered the victim without even hearing or examining any facts?
Each case should be treated as unique and examined on its merits, not prejudged by society’s bias.

Eric says:

09:52am | 19/08/09

RT, when even the complainant herself openly admits that she was lying, you still try to twist things back to suit your sexist world-view. You’re the one with an agenda that flies in the face of the evidence.

If the media paid as much attention to the tragic affects of false claims as it does to the tragic effects of real violence, you would see a very different picture from what has been fed to you.

RT says:

10:05am | 19/08/09

Again, Eric, I admit that there are two possibilities. You can only see one. The woman said that she’d been lying earlier, yes. Courts are littered with cases of people who recant earlier evidence and it is later established that the recantation is false and the original evidence is true.  If you can’t see that   where I’ll leave it there when it comes to debating you. Tim, there is often a lack of objectivity in the media and an inclination to push an agenda and make facts fit it.  It happens on both sides of a discussion like this.

Zeta says:

10:12am | 19/08/09

Listen to you whingers. ‘Oh, it’s so hard being a male, women can take out AVOs on us and run away with our kids, oh woe is me’. And now these pounces are complaining that women are engaging in domestic violence too. Harden up. Being a man in the 21st Century is still awesome. I wake up every day and thank God for my Y chromosome. But with great power, comes great responsibility, and occassionaly, sacrifice.

One sacrifice, is admitting that women are always right. There is no point arguing. If a woman reckons you’re a sod deserving of an AVO, it’s time to pack your things, tell the officer ‘fair cop, I guess I am a bit of a bastard’ and move on. If a woman reckons you’re so much of a sod you deserve a slap in the chops, you need to turn the other cheek and say ‘thank you ma’am, may I have some more?’ And if you’re a genuine dog who beats up on a woman, then you’re deserving of a reasonable stint in a corrective services facilitiy where you’ll experience first hand what it’s like to be locked in a room with a bloke who knock saround people smaller than him.

In this case, Blondie’s boyfriend got lucky. She seems like a real keeper. But Lisa, you should remember that in New South Wales, our Police don’t even need the woman’s acquiessence to issue an interim 24 hour AVO. And a good thing too. This saves lives, and gets scum bags off the streets, freeing up more young women from their abusive partners so they can date kind, gentle, ultra conservative patriots like me.

Claire says:

10:16am | 19/08/09

Eric - it is true that people’s lives can be destroyed by false allegations - and this is terrible. But luckily we have a legal system which requires a burden of evidence before a conviction can be made.

And many men are also the victims of domestic violence - no-one is disputing this. But the sad truth (and statistical reality) is that women are victimised more, and with more serious consequences, and the amount of complaints seen and dealt with by the courts merely represent the tip of the ice-berg. You don’t need a feminist to tell you this - simply ask any police officer.

Dragnet says:

10:57am | 19/08/09

What if Blondie is lying now?  She has been forced by her boyfriend to attend the court house and remove the application or risk suffering a worse fate.  It happens.

Stella says:

11:25am | 19/08/09

I think this makes the malicious and ill-informed judgement that a well-groomed and well-spoken woman is unlikely to be a victim of domestic violence. I know better than that.

Suze says:

12:10pm | 19/08/09

As someone who has had an AVO against a very abusive and dangerous ex. at the time of being entrenched in the cycle of abuse and manipulation that is Domestic Violence it was very difficult to get an AVO in the first place especially against a person you believe to love and believe will change and believe didn’t “really” intend to hurt you. I was incredibly brainwashed and in the psychological choke of my ex.  What people don’t realize is how awful it is to have to involve police and the courts against someone you were intimate with and “believe” to love. What people don’t see is when those abusive exes keep breaking those orders by sending crap like flowers, poetry, attending men’s behavioral programs etc. just to manipulate their way back into your World and when you have become a victim of domestic violence you are very vulnerable and isolated especially in your thought process. Explain to me why i changed an AVO for an ex who broke my collar bone and tried to murder me on many occasions, I’m quite sure it wasn’t to “play games” as a vexatious girlfriend or just some “lovers quarrel”.

Lexi says:

01:38pm | 19/08/09

I’d just like to say to the ladies who’ve bravely shared their stories here today - thank you.  I hope your life is better now - surviving what you did has made you a role model.

To Eric, I’m not criticising you, just saying that from the sum of your posts, I think you must have gone through something terrible in a relationship with a woman (be it a wife, mother, friend, sister or daughter).  Not all women are bad, after your money, trying to get you or trying to bring down men.  The women I know wouldn’t marry and have sons if we hated men.  Consider seeing a counsellor who specialises in men’s issues - because it’s one thing to want to make the world a better place, it’s another entirely to blame half the population for the things that make you unhappy.  Surely you’d like to be happy?

Amy says:

01:40pm | 19/08/09

This opinion piece is based on a conversation the author eavesdropped on and contains no facts that I can see.

I understand the point the author is trying to make, and it is in the best of intentions, but I don’t understand how she intends to argue it using this flimsy piece of second hand information…

james says:

02:45pm | 19/08/09

Missing the point here people.  As Charles Dickens said, the whole point of the law is to make business for itself at the expense of the rest of us and thesse AVOs fit the bill admirably.  It is a bit awkward trying to explain how and individual can be penalized by such an order in a free country without any evidence but hey, let’s not split hairs. It’s easier to prosecute them for breaking the bogus order anway, much easier to find evidence for this.  That means of course that we can jail parents wh

Ben says:

02:53pm | 19/08/09

People who claim that men are discriminated against in our society are very greatly mistaken.

Such claims remind me of the disturbing blokes self described as ‘black shirts’ or some such who protested outside the Family Court some years ago claiming that the court and the Family Law discriminated against men.

Putting aside the nasty historical reasonance of their self applied label, I can understand that some, a lot or maybe even most people who have their family arrangements determined by the court are angry but these people’s anger was just too intense to be reasonable and had an almost eerie feel to it.

I think as Simmo has pointed out that our society retains many forms of courtesy and other inter-gender arrangements that are arguably anachronistic if men and women are equal etc etc. I personally would prefer that a double standard continues to exist where girls hit boys and boys are taught not to hit them back because its training for adulthood and respecting women not to mention the fact that adult men can usually hit harder. But I don’t think our social commentators and feministas have bought any intellectual honesty to this issue or explored the understandable confusion a young man is entitled to feel these days - is still expected to pay the cheque even though the young lady is his professional equal in every way (we know he will if he wants to get any further which is as it should be), how does he manage to exude the masculinity fortunately still favoured by the womenfolk without verging into boofhead insensetivity and copping a tsunami of outrage?
One suspects this won’t happen until those of our feminist commentariat fortunate enough to have sons find themselves consoling their sensetive sons spurned by girls still disturbing attracted to the old fashioned traits of the patriarchy.
As for AVO’s and bimbos - the reality is that in Victoria at least the Police are unable to assist a woman with a violent boyfriend or other male with whom they live unless they already have AVO against them.

alan says:

03:07pm | 19/08/09

Eric, You are so right about ‘dropping the woman straight away’.  I’d been separated under the same roof with my ex for four years, living in ‘the cone of silence’, when one night my wife said ‘I think I want a divorce’.  I answered ‘you’ve got it’, and we split everything down the middle within the month.  After 32 years of crap, it was over, and I started to live again!

Jimmy says:

03:14pm | 19/08/09

AVOs are dished out like lollywater.  They’re often granted to applicants without the recipient even being aware of what’s is going on.  No evidence of wrongdoing is required for some Nazi Magistrate to grant them - it is a way of providing patronage to colleagues.  They are a great tool for divorce lawyers; they used them to seperate children from parents and force them into court at great expense to try and get them back.

jimmy says:

03:17pm | 19/08/09

The Blackshirts were men - for the most part legally unimpeachable - who’d had their children judicially kidnapped.  Good reason to be upset. The AVO is a political tool.  We’ve had assault laws in place since time immemorial. The end result is 20% of prison inmates are in there for doing things the rest of the country is entitled to do.  I spent time in Maximum Security for writing to my stolen children.  Seig Hiel!

davido says:

03:39pm | 19/08/09

I think it is better to have some false claims get through the system rather than have a system that discourages some legitimate claims.

Having said that, you need to have a system of redress for those falsely restricted by an AVO. That system needs to be efficient, affordable and available.

Ben - you are so wrong. Hope you never get on the wrong side.

By the way I lived in a share house some 15 years ago with a women who used an AVO in order to prevent having to pay back a debt to some guy (sucker). So false claims do occur.

Pete says:

04:29pm | 19/08/09

This report is an inconvenient truth that some people would prefer was never reported. Obviously the falsely accused man is the victim here but amazingly that is hardly acknowledged by some posters in the thread. The refusal of old school feminists to deal honestly with the complexity of gender relations today is one reason why feminism, having achieved so much, is increasingly a reactionary and irrelevant doctrine. As the father of three daughters, I’m 100% against violence against women but I’m equally against violence against men, something that is far more prevalent than some posting here can admit, lest reality intrude on their comfortable trench.

iansand says:

04:52pm | 19/08/09

It is not just personal disputes.  I know odf a recalcitrant tenant of commercial property who got an AVO against her landlord.  It meant the landlord could not approach his own premises, or approach the tenant to collect rent.

The police are in an impossible situation.  They have to accept what the complainant says because the consequences of not doing that are potentially horrendous.  But that puts them at the mercy of someone who is prepared to manipulate the system.  Anyone who thinks that the system is not manipulated is living in fairyland.  No sex has a monopoly on lies or truth.

Eric says:

05:52pm | 19/08/09

From the article and many of the comments, it seems there are many cases of AVO abuse.

I eagerly await the arrival of the honest and unbiased journalists who will give this story the in-depth investigation it deserves.

Such journalists do exist ... right?

Ben says:

06:35pm | 19/08/09

Davido - I’m so wrong. I thought I said that I said in Victoria the Police need effectively need an AVO to do anything meaningful to assist a woman (or male for that matter) who has a fear of violence from someone already on their premises i.e partner or BF/GF.
I didn’t think I needed to spell out that it was regrettable that this is the case - but there you go! Its not their fault that they have to get an AVO just to feel secure. Of course false claims occur in any system like this, but those instances are far, far fewer than those situations where they are a success.
As for Jimmy’s scary, scary views - what do you say?
Legally unimpeachable maybe - but so what? Make them nice guys? Make there way tooooo angry? Make you wonder why they picked name?

Annabelle says:

07:26pm | 19/08/09

Interesting to note that “jimmy” who posted in defence of the Blackshirts posted at around the same time as this article was posted on familylawwebguide by a member of the Shared Parenting Council (Fathers Rights Group) who lives in Victoria and was friends with many members of the blackshirts. Conincidence, I don’t think so?
So many of the Fathers Rights groups think ALL DV against women is false and yet they then crow that men are equally the victims. You can’t have it both ways.

Gillian says:

11:00pm | 19/08/09

I understand the point that you are trying to make that ADVOs may be obtained out of spite or may not be obtained for legitimate reasons. That point is very clear. However, for me personally, your lead for your article takes away the validity of your argument.

I may be misunderstanding your article but you seem to be saying that because the woman was clear, eloquent and well-mannered, then you suspected her reasons for getting the ADVO was unjustified and her manner had to be falsified. So if she wasn’t as immaculate in appearance and didn’t communicate as well, you would have believed her story?

As I’m sure you’re well aware, women who are abused lie about the abuse and cover up the abuse for their partners for years to their family, friends, neighbours and work colleagues. They are practiced liars. So it’s very plausible that someone could ask for an ADVO, retract it and lie about lying essentially. Your article is based on a gut instinct and sadly, that wouldn’t stand up in court.

I agree with Lexi that “[These women] need more support in order to pursue a life without abuse - not stereotypes created to paint them as troublemakers and wanna-be victims.”

You say that “Today’s society has applaudingly embraced victim’s rights, and it is an important keystone in legal and social development.” – how so? From what I can see, this is far from the case and unfortunately articles like this only seek to as Claire says, “trivialise domestic violence or the effect it has on women’s self esteem through under-researched opinion pieces.”

And if Lexi is right in saying that an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) is now called a Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders (ADVO), surely this would have just required a little fact checking?

http://www.30isthenewblack.com

davido says:

11:35pm | 19/08/09

Ben I think you are right about the police needing an AVO in order to do anything. Which sort of makes sense doesnt it?

Ben, when I refer to you being wrong I am only referring to this statement ‘... who claim that men are discriminated against in our society are very greatly mistaken.’ I would suggest that the justice system greatly favours women in regards to custody of children. A lawyer friend of mine tells me that in a break-up the women will ALWAYS get the kids unless she is a proven drug addict/child abuser.

The problem is that no action is taken against those who abuse the system.

Gillian says:

12:10am | 20/08/09

Davido, I definitely think the justice system favours men over women in custody cases but the point about AVOs or AVDOs is made very badly in this article.

Eric says:

06:53am | 20/08/09

I think I can see the point the feminists in this thread are making.

If a woman says a man is guilty, he’s guilty. If a woman says a man is innocent, he’s still guilty.

This is a perfect example of the discrimination men face in society, right here among the comments.

eag says:

08:44am | 20/08/09

Interesting to see that Eric really did have another agenda here when he accused me of sexism and not knowing anything about domestic violence.He clearly shows the attitudes that society is up against if we are to see any positive changes and improvement in this difficult minefield.
By the way I do know from experience what I’m talking about and yes I’m a feminist.

PC says:

08:57am | 20/08/09

Eric your “perfect example of the discrimination men face in society,” is perfect because you made it up. “I think I can see the point the feminists in this thread are making” which is very different to the point the feminists may or may not have actually made. Its always easy to argue against a straw person of your own making. A lot of opinions Eric and very little argument makes your delusional nightmare of a world run by evil women less a concern than your persecution complex.

Eric says:

08:59am | 20/08/09

eag: Of course you’re a feminist. I could tell by the way your first comment immediately assumed that the man was guilty and the woman was abused.

Thank you for proving my point.

Voxpop says:

09:36am | 20/08/09

I would think that the men here beating their drum would be in a position to understand where women are coming from - DV affects men and women.  But no you come accross as filled with hate and loathing for the whole female population.  Sure you may have some personal history that frames your stance but denying the obvious doesn’t help your credibility.  There’s always two sides to a story which is why the application of AVO’s is a difficult one.  I personally know of a few instances where the male has an AVO out on his ex - so yes it goes both ways and yes can also look vexatious with only one side of the story.  It would be great if people respected others more and handled break-ups, betrayals and differences better but unfortunately instead of moving on some just can’t help being manipulative and vengeful.  Both sexes are guilty of this. 
As for the separate issue of child custody this also stems from a breakdown in communication and loathing for one another caused by numerable differences and a lack of respect and understanding.  How 2 people can go from love and commitment to outright hate is perhaps tied to grievances leading up to the breakdown of the relationship and intolerance afterwards but when there are kids involved both parties need to work at facilitating an understanding to benefit the kids even if you have to grit your teeth and put up with sh*t in the process.  Unless you do everything you can and make sacrifices to minimise disruption you’re not really trying.  And I dare say that there’s much more to a story than either side lets on - so for someone to say they ended up in maximum security prison just for writing a letter leaves out all of the escalating trouble and retaliatory action that lead up to that taking place.  Not laying blame on one person here it takes two to argue but at some point this gets out of hand and parents are both behaving selfishly when they allow their relationship to affect their childs wellbeing in such a way.

Kylie says:

10:03am | 20/08/09

Eric.. We all face discrimination of some kind, at some stage (if not always).

I don’t feel these 40-odd comments are a fair representation of the opinion of society as a whole on this topic - no reasonable person should. However, you seem to have, as evidenced by you giving thanks for your “point” being proven in all this… Perhaps you could accept the possibility that there’s more than one point of view allowed in a discussion and allow opinion givers their freedom of opinion without responding with malice or by making generalisations (eg. by coining someone a feminist simply because they’re a female siding with another female - by the same token that would make you a chauvenist, wouldn’t it?). It is typically those who recognise that communication is two way who get along well with others. I think you’ve demonstrated what happens when one wears blinkers, so to speak.

I bet you aren’t feeling much love are you? Try giving out what you want to get in return. Oh and you sure do have a lot to say about DV and AVO’s (supposedly). This knowledge, coupled with your lack of compassion and your passive aggression is quite telling of the origin of your bitterness…

Peace out homey.

Pete says:

10:37am | 20/08/09

Some of the comments directed against Eric are very revealing. Whether you agree with Eric or not, he is making a case and those who disagree are free to debate him - on the facts and evidence. But what comes through from some posters is a patronising personal attack that seeks to undermine Eric’s arguments by undermining him personally. So we see him accused of being unhappy, not giving enough love and being warped by an imagined personal history that is total supposition. This is precisely the sort of belittling that women have rightly complained about in the past when it was directed at them.

Bill Steamshovel says:

11:00am | 20/08/09

Miles, the problem is that while applications for ADVO’s and rape accusations by women are taken seriously, ones made by men aren’t. In addition to that nothing is being done to deter frivolous claims.

In addition to that, take attitudes like Zeta’s and Ben’s. They are tantamount to accepting and even welcoming slavery on some ridiculous notion that it is ok to visit violence upon someone, so long as it is a man.

smudge says:

11:23am | 20/08/09

The ex partner of a friend used an assault allegation and ADVO as a vexatious attempt to gain the upper hand in a property dispute.  It failed.  These are two women by the way.  Blind freddy and his dog could see that this was an abuse of the system but due process had to be observed.  When the judges (dismissed) verdict was announced my blood boiled that this nasty piece of work wasted so much of the courts time and resources, took a police officer off the streets for the duration of the court appearances (not to mention wasting time lodging the complaint) and it caused untold distress to my friend and her family in addition to the expense of legal representation.  Most importantly though, it made a mockery of the AVO system which should be there to protect people who truly need it.  There should be serious consequences for people found to be abusing the system.

New Woman says:

12:59pm | 20/08/09

Interesting reading.  It appears that a majority of female commentators believe this women’s actions are defensible.  Behind this attitude is a view (that is female supremist) held by far too many women that only men can be abusive and violent and women are always victims.  This is not just true, from my experience and observation.

I have suffered at the hands of my mother and my two older sisters.  And I have been the aggressor in two of my relationships with men.  But I was pushed into couselling and it was the best thing that ever happened to me.  It opened my eyes, changed my life and now I am in a loving and respectful relationship with a gentle and kind man.

joe says:

01:07pm | 20/08/09

In family court disputes lawyer often encourage parents to get a AVO as it helps their case for custody.  There needs to be more investigation by police before they give AVOs and pergery charges for unneeded AVO’s

Mondo Rock says:

02:01pm | 20/08/09

The bottom line here is that by declaring that she made a false statement to police Blondie was admitting to having committed a criminal offence. 

One would hope that she has now been brought up on criminal charges - and that when she gets her day in court the judge properly considers the damage that falsely obtaining an AVO does to our community (and sentences her appropriately).  This woman should suffer consequences for her lies and deception.

Julie Coker-Godson says:

02:44pm | 20/08/09

@ Joe:  I would hope that your comment about lawyers encouraging clients to get AV orders is not correct (unless of course there is a very real threat of harm to the client).  This would be an abuse of process as well as the client risking charges of perjury.  Any lawyer found guilty of such could well find themselves before the Law Society on charges of unprofessional conduct.  I agree with an earlier post that this article has not approached the subject very well.  The physical/clothed appearance of a person is not the appropriate way to assess whether that person is or is not subject to domestic violence.  To all posters I would simply say that one cannot generalise over the issuance of AVOs.  The reasons behind the applications are quite diverse and complex in many cases.  I truly believe that it is only a minority that we get to hear about who abuse the system because it is not quite so easy to do as we might all think.

Geoff says:

02:52pm | 20/08/09

To clarify:
ADVO = ‘Apprehended Domestic Violence Order’, or in old money: AVO ‘Apprehended Violence Order’. This is a court order issued between parties who are currently or who have previously been in a ‘defined domestic relationship’, ie: married, defacto, intimate relationship, related, living in the same household….

The ADVO is a court order that restricts the actions of the defendant (the violet / abusive person) and places sometimes very strict conditions to apprehend, or restrict, his / her behaviour. In cases where police deem it essential for immediate protection of the ‘protected person’, an ‘Interim ADVO’ is applied for through an on call Magistrate and if approved is served on the defendant (quite often in police custody). This is enforceable from when it is served on the defendant until it is heard at court. When Police are involved, it is the Police who apply for the ADVO (not the protected person), as a step to reduce the likelihood of threats being made behind closed doors for the ADVO to be dropped.

In cases where immediate intervention is not required, ADVOs are applied for by victims or police.  At the hearing, both protected person and defendant are present, although they can be heard and issued in the absence of the defendant.

Similarly, ‘APVO’s (Apprehended Personal Violence Order) also restrict a defendant’s behaviour, however these are used in situations where the defendant and protected person haven’t been in a defined relationship ie, they are neighbours, colleagues, friends, unknown persons….

Its important to understand that ADVOs / APVOs aren’t magic pieces of paper. They aren’t bullet proof and if you hold one in front of you in defence of a violent attack, it won’t help you at all. The idea is that the defendant recognises certain behaviour is wrong and doesn’t continue to do it. Police can act on legislation and when a defendant contravenes an order, severe penalties may apply. Orders may include that the defendant may not contact / approach / harass / stalk / intimidate or otherwise interfere with the protected person(s) or a person who the protected person has a relationship with. So if the defendant contravenes an order to contact the protected person by any means other than through legal representatives and sends a drunk threatening text message one night, the order has been contravened and charges can apply.

Assaults are bad, but domestic assaults are worse. If you can’t be safe in your own home, where can you be safe? ADVO’s should just be a method of aiming to protect victims. They shouldn’t be used by vengeful parties or used to get an advantage of power in a relationship but sadly they are. Penalties should apply for false reports and if you find yourself in a relationship where an ADVO is needed, re-assess your position and get out of there!

Garry says:

02:59pm | 20/08/09

I am disturbed by much that I have read here. Are women (and forgive me if that assumption is wrong) really using an AVO to get back at a man for some reason other than being violent to them? are lawyers really telling people to take them out to help their case, do people really use them to get custody of children in a divorce. Do women feel it right that they use an AVO and the stigma attached to that as something to be happy about, are they that angry to resort to such things?

If the answer is yes then I am actually let down by my fellow Australians. We obviously need tougher guidelines to protect the woman (or male) who is the victim of a violent abuser otherwise what will happen is ‘yeah sure right, you probably lied to get more from the divorce settlement’ and that is an ultimate shame to a real victim.

I would like to think Blonde did find herself being charged if found to have used an AVO in a way to abuse the system. Me I would have dumped her immediately, for even in a moment of anger to use such a thing is a vile attack and shows a character I would not like to be friendly with. I would ask myself would she do it again if we were living together or married even just to get her way?

We already have too many issues in our legal system to abuse AVO is such a way.

Voxpop says:

03:13pm | 20/08/09

Totally agree that ADVO’s should not be used falsely - I don’t think anyone disagrees with that (including those that have unfortunately been labelled as feminists).

And they don’t always help the victims either - where someone is hell bent on doing harm.  It’s a sad fact that the victims of abuse feel trapped by ADVO’s because even if they move to try to get away they have to submit the new address or reapply if they move interstate - so the exclusion zone etc can be defined.  Meaning that they have to keep looking over their shoulder or go off system and take their chances.

Al says:

07:59pm | 20/08/09

rubbish julie…...even if the police refuse to support a bogus avo, you can still go to the court and lodge it yourself and the police will then be forced to act on it…..‘when is an avo a tactic in a lovers quarrel?’.......99% of the time.
A piece of paper can not protect someone in serious danger. It can only be used as a tactic
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorn. No point feeling for him tho, he is most at fault by staying with her after doing that. I would be taking one out myself in that situation as it is clearly him that needs protecting

Al says:

12:41am | 21/08/09

Gary…..whats the address of that rock you live under…..its ok…must be the same one julie is under.
I was thinking a little about this, if they were serious about protecting people in a dangerous situation, they would have a safe house system with security so that if there was an imediate danger that person had a place of refuge…....if you were genually scared or threatened you would surely be happy to use it…...where as the little trolops like blondie would definately decline the offer as it would be an inconveniance that wouldnt really suit the purpose of their action. The first priority should be the safety of the threatened person. Any system that simply takes one persons word without evidence is surely wide open to abuse, and sorry to say but that goes double when a scorn woman is involved.

Jack says:

01:02pm | 09/09/09

when a woman wants to swap partners an AVO,in this case a PFVO, is very easy to obtain the Police are obliged to issue orders to dispossess the male (father) permanently from their home and assets for 12 months typically followed up by the Safe At Home policy.
The man hasnt got a prayer only after 2-3 years enduring vindictive systemic vexatious litgation often funded by free legal aid has to make application to the Family Court for justice..

Jack says:

05:53pm | 09/09/09

Even the legal aid proponents advise complainants to “talk to the Police they will help you achieve the outcome you want”.
This reeks of predetermining the outcome of the justice system.
What justice system?
When a man seeks to obtain a PFV order he is largely ignored or advised “don’t do that or you will never get to see your children”
False claims of intimidation are all that is needed to dispossess a joint property owner from his home and children until the exorbitant legal costs of bringing an application to Court and obtaining a hearing can occur.
This is a river of gold to the lawyers also.
Delayed justice is OK if you can afford it and wait for it!
I do not think the Magna Carta principles are observed in this country.

Bud says:

07:53am | 05/12/09

I agree that AVO’s are too easy to get. This means that they can not be policed properly. However, the woman called April mentioned this artcile has been seriously maligned. I wonder where the writer has gotten her information. This writer should do her research and not rely on biased opinions. She has never spoken with ‘April’ and has should be ashamed of her totally unprofessional reporting. She always can contact “April” and then rewrite this part of the article. There are plenty of cases of women victims having a raw deal in the NSW justice system she could also investigate. Shame on you!

icle

Sean says:

08:58pm | 14/06/10

Whatever happened being considered innocent until proven guilty?  Since when has it been OK to punish innocent people for something they’ve not done?  Welcome back dark ages!  Instead of just accepting the word of the applicant (male or female) in many cases what’s wrong with at least putting in place a process where the police are obliged to give the accused an opportunity to state their case and then trusting that the police have some degree of intelligence to evaluate the standard of proof and to make a judgement on the probability of the legitimacy of the application.  I have been excluded from my home and denied access to my children for almost 12 months while interim orders were put in place restricting me.  After a long and tedious battles in court, the vexatious and frivolous claims were dismissed….The emotional scars on my children and me are permanent.

Ross says:

10:33am | 11/10/10

Claire says “simply ask any police officer” - like the one who stormed my flat while i was in the shower waving that powerful little piece of paper full of my ex-partner’s lies? yeh right - he couldnt wait to play the hero to her and bully to me. So many (predominatly male) police officers do the same thing, especially when they know there are no witnesses to their actions. Supposedly, police are responsible for gathering evidence, but they only gather it from one side if they can - and it gets more brownie points to gather evidence against the man tahn id does to gather evidence FOR him. The NSW police procedures for dealing with domestic violence is totally slanted in favour of the victim and can be applied in such a manner as to increase evidence supporting them and dismissing evidence against them. If the government policies supporting victims only were changed to ensure that the defendant is equally represented then a lot more could be solved - this however makes the police more responsible instead of taking the easy way out and following the current system, and reduces their statistics continually being contrived to give them more power - as well as all the government-funded womens groups. What hope is there for the victims of this strategy…?

Peter says:

04:54pm | 19/05/11

I agree that AVO’s are too easy to get based on lies and false allegations.  Unless there is a proper system in place, some people will abuse it.  There should be stiffer penalty for those abusing it.  The police sometimes are biased and act just based on what the so-called victims say without proper investigation.  They cannot assume whatever the victim says is true!

Peaceseeker says:

06:43pm | 01/08/11

Both your stories of “blondie” and “April” are of your opinion.
Stories like that are yes,  true in a yes/no, black/white cave man rational, but don’t you think you lack information and the deeper truth of a 2 sided take in the lives of these people.

Clearly your judgement is double edged for a particular reason. Is your life black and white?
You obviously think your important, as you chose to discredit those and stereotype for a reason. Maybe April isn’t the only one who has scars that prevent her from finding peace !

SvetlanaBabe says:

12:23pm | 07/10/11

I know of a quadraplegic who had an AVO succesfully taken out against him. He hasn’t moved from his bed in years!
Magistrates are pretty clueless in my view, it’s easy to pull the wool over their eyes.

J. Giggleow says:

10:44am | 09/01/12

“This sort of thing happens a lot more than many people like to think”.

Yeah some people even use it as a joke. ha ha.

Amanda Mac. says:

02:56pm | 09/01/12

I’ve got one for you….. My partner has an AVO application pending which the police took - not the woman (ex wife) just because she went and reported an incident. She didn’t sign / refused to sign a statement. The story that she told the police was that she pushed, shoved and hit her ex husband (my partner) and that he did same back. She told them he did it once compared to her many. She also admitted to shoving me because I yelled for them to stop behaving that way. Now just because she went and reported something unofficially the police saw her as the victim even though she has clearly told them she started it and actually assaulted two people. Yeah, good on you Mr Policeman.

Tracy says:

03:01pm | 16/04/12

There is such a skewed ‘truth’ here. I am separated and for 6 months have been awaiting a decision finalising my AVO.  Although I am not subjected to “high” levels of violence, the intimidation, threats, control and ‘arseholism’ I have been subjected to over the last 6 months do need some level of legal rule to prevent my ex from continuing to do whatever he wants to do to control me - and unfortunately these all occur in front of our young son. Ex has a mental health issue, which he denies, and which adds a whole level of unknown to his behaviour. These 6 months of unknown have been unreservedly all encompassing - all I want is freedom, and yet - because he is unable to ascertain right from wrong - I cannot rely on him to stop his abusive behaviour and just LEAVE ME ALONE.  These measures (AVO’s) are put in place to control these arseholes who just don’t understand what unacceptable behaviour is.  And it is a poor reflection on society that there are so many willing to judge us all with the same spoon - that of vindictive, drunk, spiteful blonde.  I am not denying that some of these exist (unfortunately) but many of us seeking AVO’s are JUSTIFIED!!! Each situation is different.