Scary stuff in the courts

Scarily enough, the supreme court ruled that, despite the name (‘order’), restraining orders are more or less just guidelines that the police can choose to follow (or not) as they deem fit. In other words, if person A gets a restraining order against person B and the cops elect not to enforce it, there is no recourse for person A. In the particular case that decided this, a woman’s ex-husband (who she had a restraining order against) abducted her children, and the police (whom she called repeatedly) took no action for 10 hours until the ex-husband killed them all. The ex-wife informed the police where he was no less than four times, and showed up at the police station trying to get the police to take action (which they did not.) The findings of the supreme court were that (to paraphrase) “the wheels of the law grind slow; they will not be rushed, they will not be threatened, and they have no accountability.” Sounds OK unless you’re the one being stalked/threatened/abused.

Thanks to Alan for passing this one my way.