Is the Horror of False Accusation More Urgent and Credible when Harvard Law Prof Alan Dershowitz Describes It?

Stop False Allegations of Domestic Violence to WIN Child Custody!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

“American Law is Irresponsible”

The American Civil Standard of Evidence and Abuse of Restraining Orders

“On the European continent, for the court to hold against the defendant, the judge must be convinced that the facts brought forward by the plaintiff in support of the claim are indeed true. In principle, continental law does not make a difference between civil law and criminal law […]. By contrast, U.S. law has three different standards of proof […]. In criminal law, the charge must be established ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ In civil law, normally the plaintiff wins if only ‘the preponderance of the evidence’ is in [his or] her favour. Only in a limited number of civil law matters, of particular gravity for the defendant, the intermediate standard of ‘clear and convincing evidence’ must be met.”

—Dr. Cristoph Engel

The monograph from which this quotation is excerpted, which is by a professor of experimental law and economics, begins by candidly remarking that “American law is irresponsible.”

No argument here.

At the root of restraining order injustice is the lax evidentiary standard applied to plaintiffs’ allegations. Not only may allegations on restraining orders be false; a judge doesn’t have to be convinced that they’re not false to find in favor of their plaintiff.

Excepting in Maryland, which adjudicates the merits of civil restraining order allegations based on the intermediate standard of “clear and convincing evidence,” the standard applied to restraining orders is “preponderance of the evidence.”

If claims seem more likely true than false, “preponderance of the evidence” is satisfied.

In other words, the law is contented if a single judge (not a jury of independent thinkers) reckons the allegations against a defendant are “probably true” (or “maybe true” or “true enough”). To be effective, all allegations have to be is compelling.

Making allegations compelling isn’t a tall task for people in the throes of bitter animosity, as restraining order plaintiffs typically are, and it’s a cakewalk for unscrupulous liars, who are hardly rare among restraining order plaintiffs

.Accomplices in Fraud: When False Accusation Is a Team Sport

Constitutional Rights Are Only Real if They Can’t Be Denied: On the Price of Tolerating Bad Law

Related articles

• In the deeply corrupt ‘child protection’ Mafia this is not even rare: ‘Why I falsely accused father of abusing daughter’
• Introducing The Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts Radio Show
• The rights that children have to free and equal association with both fit parents that should not be invaded by the State or infringed upon by another parent
• Court: No Visitation Rights for Woman After Same-Sex Divorce

• ---

• Outright abomination against rudimentary civil rights and principles of law.(civilrightsinfamilylaw.wordpress.com)

  ---

• A Circle of Moms Reports on False Allegations to CPS (and Says the Same Things That Father’s Groups Say about the Abuse of Restraining Orders and Domestic Violence Laws)(legallykidnapped.blogspot.com)

  ---

• To all the dads that have lost their kids to CPS(legallykidnapped.blogspot.com)

  ---

• Judicial Accountability for Court Ordered Parental Alienation(civilrightsinfamilylaw.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Contact Denial Grievance Founded with Recommendations ~ Kevin Avard – Google+(standupforzoraya.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Florida legislators have been asked to look into reforms to help husbands who claim they have been victims of false domestic violence injunctions.(iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com)

  ---

TALKING BACK to restraining orders

From “A Nightmare of False Accusation That Could Happen to You” by Alan M. Dershowitz (The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 14, 2015):

Alan M. Dershowitz, arguably “the best-known criminal lawyer in the world,” is a Harvard Law School professor emeritus and a distinguished and prolific writer.

Imagine the following situation: You’re a 76-year-old man, happily married for nearly 30 years, with three children and two grandchildren. You’ve recently retired after 50 years of teaching at Harvard Law School. You have an unblemished personal record, though your legal and political views are controversial. You wake up on the day before New Year’s Eve to learn that two lawyers have filed a legal document that, in passing, asserts that 15 years ago you had sex on numerous occasions and in numerous locations with an underage female.

The accusation doesn’t mention the alleged victim’s name—she’s referred to as Jane Doe…

View original post 309 more words