“Daddy is frustrated” I kid you not. This is a defense that has worked for the second time when an alleged parent threatens to beat the other parent to death, harasses, stalks, sends obscene emails and text messages and destroys a person’s calm and involves children in his abuse against the mother by inciting them to leave harassing and obscene voice mail messages on a parent’s phone.
A previous” evaluator” put “Daddy” on notice three years ago due to his abusive conduct and obscene phone calls to the mother in front of the children and here we are again three years later where the ABUSE is allowed to continue rampantly and unabated where Daddy is frustrated when he wants to beat mommy to death.
The domestic violence act in California considers family code § 6320 to determine what are considered acts of abuse and they include under subsection a the following:
(a) The court may issue an ex parte order enjoining a party from molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting, battering, harassing, telephoning, including, but not limited to, annoying telephone calls as described in Section 653m of the Penal Code, destroying personal property, contacting, either directly or indirectly, by mail or otherwise, coming within a specified distance of, ordisturbing the peace of the other party, and, in the discretion of the court, on a showing of good cause, of other named family or household members.
Strangely enough the DV act does not specify that “frustration” causing these acts is considered to be a valid affirmative defense.
Instead anger management and battery intervention is routinely ordered in these cases in order to prevent irreparable harm recognizing that the ANGER and HATRED towards the other parent are out of control severely damaging children. Just not when “Daddy is frustrated” in other word putting the blame on the victim who dares to bring the abuse forward.
However, the court in a previous case held on the same day kindly granted a restraining order listing THREE incidents where the victim was not repeatedly advised “IF IT OCCURRED” when evidence was presented that all behavior defined in CA Family code 6320 as abusive conduct DID occur. The Riverside Superior Court as an institution fails to protect women and children and refuses to put the best interest of the child standard first in any capacity thriving on torturing select litigants and their children on an endless basis, delighting in the INHUMANE destruction of a parent child relationship by the abusive parent who is merely “FRUSTRATED” and does everything he can to annihilate the mother from her children’s life.