Violation of a Juvenile Restraining Order As an Adult

[Inittowinit]

Well, stalking does not require it be done in person and on sight. We make cases for stalking like that all the time.

646.9. (a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly
follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who
makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in
reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her
immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by
imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a
fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that
fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

The key element for most DAs is the fear for their safety. Too many victims will act out of fear, but will admit to only being annoyed or harassed.

As for the order, since I cannot read it, I cannot know what it said. When I see them they do not have conditions of a juvenile court, and when they are issued pre-conviction, they are generally replaced post-conviction. I suppose some courts screw that up.

I'd say the key part is the "and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear...".

I've not threatened her at all nor have any plan to do so and again the intent, referring to Mens Rea meaning you actually want to insight fear within them, which is very very far from what happened here. I believe she was just mad we had a long talk and I didn't talk to her or try to for another 8 months after that. So she was not fearful at all and I gave her no reason to be nor would I ever give a credible threat that would insight fear in another person purposely. That's just wrong.

Yea I believe they did not replace it post conviction and that may be the underlying problem.

[cdwjava]

I'd say the key part is the "and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear...".

Case law has modified the "credible threat" such that the element can be met by other actions, though the element of fear is the one I have historically seen as the stumbling block.

I've not threatened her at all nor have any plan to do so and again the intent, referring to Mens Rea meaning you actually want to insight fear within them, which is very very far from what happened here.

I can describe to you actions of people who "love" the person they are stalking, yet their actions would give any reasonable person a reason to fear for their safety. The intent can be shown through actions and not necessarily through a very specific threat of harm. if the threat of harm were the sole requirement, we'd rarely be able to make a stalking case as most are not so dumb as to make such a specific threat.

Just saying that if you were to continue to talk to her you leave yourself open to new potential charges - so, don't communicate with her.

[Inittowinit]

So if I were to send her a message and with the knowledge that it is perfect legal to do so and that message simply stated,

Hey I know we've had our differences in the past and I've done my share of stupid things especially when I was younger, but I'm grown up now and I'm living life and I'm going to make something of myself despite all the people who told me I couldn't, and I truthfully and genuinely hope that whatever career field you go into that you would love it and dedicate yourself and make your mark on this crazy place that we call Earth. Do the best you can and always remember that in life you can be anything you want to be if you're willing to put in the effort and put your heart into it. Have a good day and a great life, it was good knowing you, goodbye.

And I sent this sometime in the future like a month or so you believe that this would be stalking and threatening and to a reasonable person would make them fear for their safety?

I don't believe myself to be a bad person, I know that there is a fine line between crazy and nice and there is a fine line between love and making someone fearful, I want everyone that I know to succeed and go on to live lives that make them and those around them happy day in and day out, I know that hope might be considered naive but maybe I'm just an optimist who believes there's still some hope for this world.

[free9man]

Just let it be. Don't communicate with her in any fashion for any reason. A reasonable person would recognize that it is time to leave the past where it is and move on.

Regardless of whether you would be charged for it or not, which no one can predict, it isn't wise. You may not be convicted but that doesn't mean your life can't be inconvenienced by an investigation, etc...

[Inittowinit]

I was gunna let it be haha, but I'm one of those people that when you tell them they can't do something it makes them want to do it a hundred times more.

So lets just leave it at that and part ways.

[cdwjava]

If you contact her, you invite police scrutiny again. And even if not "stalking" there are other charges that can be brought into play (harassing communication per PC 653m, for one). All you might do is convince a court that, perhaps, that restraining order was a good idea and a new one should be issued.

Leave it be.

[PandorasBox]

Do not have contact with her. You don't know how much stress any contact from you can cause.

[Inittowinit]

I said let's drop the issue and I'm not going to message her but if people keep telling me I can't do something or not to do something it's going to only make me want to do it more.

Let's part ways good day gentlemen

And btw


(a)Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or property of the person addressed or any member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith.

I'm not using obscene or vulgar language nor being threatening and it would if I did message her be in good faith.

So PC 653m doesn't apply.

But thanks for the legal advice and I don't plan to waste my time on her or anyone else, good day.

[cdwjava]

I said let's drop the issue and I'm not going to message her but if people keep telling me I can't do something or not to do something it's going to only make me want to do it more.

Let's part ways good day gentlemen

And if that is the attitude you take towards the challenges of life, you can expect many more law enforcement contacts in your future.

Heed the advice - do not contact her!

(a)Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or property of the person addressed or any member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith.

I'm not using obscene or vulgar language nor being threatening and it would if I did message her be in good faith.

Oh, you can make a case that your contact was not made in good faith. I have been the primary investigating officer in dozens of these cases in two different counties - do not assume that because your stated intent is not to annoy or harass her that a case cannot be made. Your understanding of the law is far to cursory to take that risk ... unless you get your jollies by risking incarceration.

Heed your own advice: Stay away from her and do not contact her. Move on.

[Inittowinit]

You're still missing the part with obscene language or vulgarity as well as the part part that is threatening.

No jury in the entire state of California, even the extremely conservative one that let Rodney King's assailanits be acquitted, would consider the message I provided above to be Obscene, Vulgar, or threatening in any way shape or form, and that my good sir is check-mate.