VIC Intervention order and length of time

[GlassHalfFull]

Hi all,

I currently have an interim intervention order in place. I plan to contest it in a contested hearing but I am starting to wonder if I should even bother... Here's the thing. I received the interim order back in August. My first mentions hearing was months later, and the magistrate postponed it for a further mentions hearing even though I told him at the first hearing that I wanted to contest it (he postponed it because we had an upcoming family court hearing). He has finally scheduled a directions hearing for March (7 months after I received the interim order) and I am told that it can take up to 6 months to get from the directions hearing to the contested hearing given current backlogs!!

So it could be 13 months before I even get to a point where I contest it! At best, if I win, I've still essentially served 13 months under an interim order without any recourse whatsoever, and if I lose, I am wondering whether I will then cop another 12 months on top of those 13 months!? Because my understanding is that when the magistrate turns an interim order into a final order, the usual duration is 12 months. So I could well effectively have an intervention order of 2 years. And even if I won the contested hearing, it might have actually have gone away faster had I just consented without admission in the fist place, given my contested hearing might be as far away as 13 months from the interim. Is there any likelihood that I could argue that given I have already served 12+ months under an interim order that no further time be added (assuming the magistrate is satisfied that there is no further risk obviously)? Do magistrates consider this at all or is it just a blanket 12 months most of the time?

What kind of justice is it when it takes a year just to get to a point where you can contest an intervention order?? Sounds almost like it's by design that it's easier to consent to them than contest them.

 

[sammy01]

My recollection was that mine was back dated to the date of the initial application. If I am right then accepting without admission would have been the most efficient way of dealing with it.... madness

 

[GlassHalfFull]

My recollection was that mine was back dated to the date of the initial application. If I am right then accepting without admission would have been the most efficient way of dealing with it.... madness

Well it seems that regardless of whether its back dated or not, the delays in getting a contested hearing (13 months in my case - I'm not sure if that is typical or not) makes it more efficient to consent without admission.. So yeah, like you say, it's madness. And if it wasn't for the fact that I have a family court application in progress, I wouldn't be able to see my kids the whole time??? Without any proof of any violence or crime whatsoever? That's also madness.

I really really believe that it's imperative that intervention orders must be dealt with quicker than this. Sure, maybe a contested hearing takes time and they want to discourage people from doing it. It's not fair, but I understand why they do it with limited court resources. But I think it's ridiculous that they won't hear ANY evidence from the accused at any point before a contested hearing. There needs to be a sanity check on all intervention orders within a couple of weeks of the initial application both for the sake of fairness to all parties (and the children who are innocent in all this) and to discourage frivolous applications. I understand that they need to be put in place immediately for safety reasons and that may not allow the accused to be present, but to let it drag on for a year before hearing anything from the accused... there's no justice there.

But of course with the way the political situation is, nobody has the guts to change it. Sad... I can't think of any other aspect of the law where the accused gets such poor treatment. If I were accused of a criminal offence (even to be charged requires a significant burden of proof on the police), I'd have more rights to an assumption of innocence until proven guilty than this.

 

[Jake Matherson]

I just hit my 1 year anniversary of my DVO court process with no end in sight.

My case is quite complex and it's the police that took the order out on me and not the Ex but you're not the only one in for the long haul trying to clear their name.

Without kicking off family court proceedings as you suggested I to could have gone indefinitely without seeing my kid due to no contact orders etc.
So I like your idea of a sanity check.
This could help alleviate some of the stress and anxiety that is put on a man/woman when they are told they are to have no contact with their kid staring immediately for what most people might consider no good reason when all of the facts are delivered.
However when it's the police taking the order out on you in the first place I wouldn't expect them to wake up one morning and have a change of heart.
Trust me it's guilty until proven innocent in their eyes. But this could be a different story with a semi-cooperative Ex.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

Yeah, the police took the order out on me, on my ex's behalf, too. Without discussing it with me to get my side (which the police should normally do in the course of an investigation, surely!?). But I have no faith that they would have taken a balanced approach even if they had spoken to me. The system seems rigged in favour of the accuser. I do understand how difficult to is to 'prove' or 'disprove' something that is alleged to have happened behind closed doors, but in my case, there was no evidence provided of ANYTHING. Just allegations. The intervention order even states that no medical attention or police report was made at the time of any alleged incident, so they had zero solid evidence of anything occurring, but still chose to take the order out because she 'seemed scared'. It's not difficult to play the victim...

 

[Jake Matherson]

I was the one that called the police in the first place hahaha
They got my side of the story + evidence to support my side. Didn't help.

Man and Woman in a domestic situation behind closed doors there is only one result for the short term.

Thankfully the Family Court has listened to what I have had to say and although it's taking longer than I would like the decisions that have been made so far have been more related to current issues and not the one dark cloud above my head that is an open DV case. But I can see how my case would not be the norm as there are some pretty serious issues on my Ex's side of the fence.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

In my case, we had already been separated for a few weeks when I received my intervention order. There had been zero violent interactions between us (post separation anyway, she had been violent to me while we were together) and I suspect it was essentially revenge and/or strategic advantage as directed by her legal counsel to get in first with an accusation before I could. So far, I feel like the family court has been fair with me too, and I've managed to get a few small wins, but I'm still only seeing the children with supervision. Hope that changes sooner rather than later.

 

[Philly2020]

I can't give you a solid answer, but what I can tell you is that both scenarios have happened to me. I've unfortunately had to take multiple consecutive AVO's out on a violent ex partner over the years, and one judge took into consideration 'time served' type thing, and another time the 12 months began from the date of the final hearing. I think it would be a matter of the judge on the day. I do believe you will be given an opportunity to argue your side though, if not your legal representative can.

Personally, if i were you, i'd be wanting to clear my name. Especially if already in family law court proceedings, as they can last many many many years, and it would benefit your greatly if you can show the matter was dismissed and what lengths she will go to discredit your character and her vindictiveness. My current partner has an ex-wife who is the most vindictive woman on the planet and she has made so many false accusations against him, it makes me sick. Luckily, the police worked her out soon enough, she has a reputation as a trouble maker, he has never had to face charges.

Can I please add that as a victim of domestic violence that I disagree with your statement above, 'rigged in favour of the accuser'... i understand in your specific case that may be the case, but personally, I have made many calls to the police for protection to which I did not receive because i didn't have any witnesses or physical evidence (our children were witnesses, but were young and the police refused to speak to them), so my ex-husband often got off scot-free. Each situation is different.

Also, Family Law court orders override local court orders, so if you have the interim avo, a judge can still give orders granting you visitation and during that time the intervention order is completely useless.

Good luck!

 

[GlassHalfFull]

Thanks Beth, so it seems like it's completely at the magistrate's discretion then. Interesting to hear your experiences.

I do want to clear my name, but the magistrate has already warned me when I first advised that I wanted to contest it that if there found to be violence then it may be worse than a 'consent without admission' and it may adversely affect my family law case (which I already understood, but it's almost like he's setting the scene for me to lose!).

Apologies if my 'rigged in favour of the accuser' comment was flippant. It's definitely just my experience so far but I guess it does come down to the individuals involved (police, judges etc), rather than a systematic rigging.

Yeah, I already have family court orders that have to some extent overridden my intervention order, but there are still some situations in which I have to be very careful because the family court order doesn't specifically allow certain things (like being within 200m of the childrens' schools etc) and of course I cannot communicate directly with the ex so everything is much slower and more expensive through lawyers. So I'm slowly working my way back to normality, but it takes time and I'd really love to be rid of it completely.

 

[Philly2020]

Thanks Beth, so it seems like it's completely at the magistrate's discretion then. Interesting to hear your experiences.

I do want to clear my name, but the magistrate has already warned me when I first advised that I wanted to contest it that if there found to be violence then it may be worse than a 'consent without admission' and it may adversely affect my family law case (which I already understood, but it's almost like he's setting the scene for me to lose!).

Apologies if my 'rigged in favour of the accuser' comment was flippant. It's definitely just my experience so far but I guess it does come down to the individuals involved (police, judges etc), rather than a systematic rigging.

Yeah, I already have family court orders that have to some extent overridden my intervention order, but there are still some situations in which I have to be very careful because the family court order doesn't specifically allow certain things (like being within 200m of the childrens' schools etc) and of course I cannot communicate directly with the ex so everything is much slower and more expensive through lawyers. So I'm slowly working my way back to normality, but it takes time and I'd really love to be rid of it completely.

Am I correct that there is no physical evidence corroborating your ex's story of violence? No witness testimony, no bruises, no medical report, no police photos of injuries, etc? It is merely her word against yours? In my opinion, the order is unlikely to be granted without any of this. If you do not have a history of violence, it's unlikely they will grant such an order on hearsay. I've had orders refused even when I did have photos of injuries taken by the police immediately after the incident, because there wasn't a witness and he claimed they were self inflicted (again, it will depend on the magistrate).

I wouldn't see it as 'setting the scene to lose'. I'd see it more of a warning from the magistrate 'if you did this, we will find out the truth', and a way the he has implied that if you are guilty, you are wasting their (and your own) time, which they don't take lightly. Even after all the unfair judicial encounters I've had, I still put faith in that the truth with prevail, and you've been warned that if he finds violence he will hold you accountable. If there was no violence to be found (as you've stated, because it didn't happen), I think you will be safe.

No offence taken in regards to your 'flippant' comment. I'm in a situation where I've been the victim by a male perpetrator, and with my partner who is very obviously the victim of extremely violent and vindictive behaviour from his ex-wife (textbook narcissistic psychopath), so i see both sides of the coin so to speak, and know first hand that there are plenty of male victims out there also, and that some women are just evil c$@ts....

Unfortunately, the family law court is not efficient regarding the times between court appearances. So you've been granted supervised visits at the moment? To my knowledge, you can't 'appeal' interim orders. How long between now and your next court date, if you don't mind me asking?

I am currently self represented in court, which at first wasn't ideal but now I have my head around it a little, i actually find it quite liberating. It a learning curve to say the least, but i feel i have a little more control of my case and everything I want to present to the court gets heard. Of course there is protocol that needs to be followed, but at the end of the day you are given a little slack if you're not perfect. Not having the financial burden lingering has given me the motivation to explore so many more avenues. Something you might consider, you seem articulate enough, i'm sure you'd manage, just time consuming!