Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Lightbulb Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    My question involves civil rights in the State of: NJ.
    I've posted in the forums with some help from Mr. Knowitall but I'm hoping that there are others with some experience and advice..

    A Restraining Order can restrict all contact - physical, verbal, phone, letters/cards, internet, txt messages (I found one NJ case that said a "call me" sticky note did not rise to a prosecutable event.). It can also preclude you from certain places where the victim might typically go and can otherwise preclude you from getting within a certain proximity of the victim at certain events where the courts deem reasonable that you both should be able to attend. This is typically your children's school and sporting events as you both exercise your joint parental duties and rights. This is also the case when you are picking up your kids when the restraining order does not specify curbside pick-up. You can arrive at the victim's door.

    At this point, can the LAW restrict you from having something in plain sight of the
    victim?? I'd say lewdness is illegal. Could a shirtless dad pick up his kids at the beach house? Could he bring his girlfriend with him? could he bring two scantily clad strippers one on each arm? Could he show his son a photo of his new stripper girlfriend while the victim looks on? I think lewdness is illegal and the rest is just improper by societal morals. But not illegal./ DOES ANYONE HAVE NJ OR SUPREME COURT CASE LAW THAT TESTED THESE BOUNDRIES IN A RESTRAINING ORDER CONTEMPT CASE????

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,841

    Default Re: Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    A restraining order can certainly prevent you from doing just about anything.

    You're best bet is to challenge the restraining order if you feel it is violating your rights, but the place to do that is in a separate court action. Intentionally violating it and attempting to challenge the validity after the fact is a very risky gambit. Changing the terms is easier than getting a judge to not find you in contempt for disobeying his instructions.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    I suspect that if dad were flaunting strippers or some wanton lifestyle before the child, mom would have the matter returned to family court to address what is being exposed to his child.

    I assume you are dad? If so, why is it that you feel it is more important to tweak the mother's nose than to behave with proper decorum as a role model to your child?
    **********
    Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

  4. #4

    Default Re: Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    thanks both but neither of you is rising to the challenge. I am in fact the dad and was picking up my son for visitation ON EASTER - legally, per the restraining order. My ex observed a photo from 28 years ago and turned the event into an attack to villify me in family court.

    I was not trying to test any boundries, I'm way to old and smart for that.

    I went back to Court twice very early on to have the restraining order modified so that I could communicate with my kids and go to their schools. But it is unfeasible to try to get a restraining order written to allow you to do everything that by law you are allowed to do. The restraining order identifies the restraints and unfortunately it is up to the courts to decide based on facts and logical/reasonable interpretations of the restraints. In terms of contact, the courts look at intent. In the new jersey's Brian Hoffman case, they found he made a restricted contact when he twice mailed a torn up copy of a Court Order to his ex wife. That had to go to the State Supreme Court (Appellate Division said not illegal). I'm sure the Courts looked at the implied mockery of the Court but mainly the decision rested on the fact that he could not have any other purpose to send that torn up order other than to harass. his intention was to aggravate his Ex. This were easier to decide also because there was a long history of violence (and he later cut her throat).

    But in my case, let's talk about law. Can it be illegal to allow someone to see something that isn't lewd? Do you guys know of any caselaw?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    If no order prevents it, if the protected person incidentally sees something not presented to them intentionally by the restrained party, then no violation can have occurred.

    I don't know of any NJ case law, but unless you are intentionally presenting something in such a way that it can only be intended to harass or communicate with her, it cannot be a violation of the order.

    If she used an old photo against you and the court bought into it, that's old news. You can certainly talk to your attorney about going back before the court to modify the order ... maybe.
    **********
    Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

  6. #6

    Default Re: Can It Be Illegal to Allow Someone to See an Innocuous Photograph

    that's very well worded CDW and I'll use those words in my Motion to Reconsider after losing in my Appeal with a crappy State Assigned Atty. After noting clear negligence, I tried to get a new lawyer assigned and also tried to get approval to submit an independant Brief by the Appellate Division denied me./ Now I'm doing the Motion to Reconsider on my own and need the case law that demonstrates to perfectly articulated axiom. My case was a bit messy because the Trial Judge was acting like the prosecutor and using inferences to cobble together the elements (he concluded that I must have been angry and intending to aggravate her in allowing her to observe the photo because we were also in family court). The Judge was also purposefully vague in his findings so the Appellate division inferred in the interest of the State. So at this point, I need to paint the picture clear from the testimony and cite case law to justify my logic. Your words are perfect. I'll try some in my google scholar searches but do you have any case law? or anyone else? when this is over, I'll share my material and also help anyone else in sililar plight if they are interested in working together...

    I know my case sounds ludicrous but this is how it went. I'm sure there are not too many trials that go like this and even less are brought to Appeal so that's why I'm having trouble finding the case law. I have plenty of seminal case law and some that's close but nothing clearly similar. Have you any case law from california or the Supreme Court (I know nothing this stupid could get this high)...

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Obstruction of Justice: Is It Illegal to Photograph Police
    By Bronxite in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-10-2012, 05:18 PM
  2. Defamation: Photograph Used Without Consent
    By utsarr in forum Defamation, Slander And Libel
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-28-2011, 06:55 AM
  3. Drug Possession: Prosecution for Cocaine Use in a Photograph
    By paperclock in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-19-2010, 09:32 AM
  4. Copyright Law: Publishing a Photograph
    By Mark Andrew in forum Intellectual Property
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-26-2009, 03:21 PM
  5. Copyright Law: Drawing a photograph
    By Gavzilla in forum Intellectual Property
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-22-2005, 08:24 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources