Now they have a record. And if she gets back with him again, he'll likely only get another fine if she tells on him. If he hurts her? There's a record of this violation. Time for him to collect his son, file a motion for his personal items, and move on-even if she says come back. No, go away. No, come back....
What? The judge only gave him a fine of $250? He may as well as not fined him at all, should have just said: you are guilty of violating the PPO, stay away from your wife, that's it, have a nice day. Lame as heck. It solves the immediate issue (assuming he does stay away), but no punishment for clearly violating the PPO, and violated it by having GUNS! A big no-no if you are the respondent in a protective order. Not a problem according the judge, he can have his guns in 2026, easy-peazy.
IMHO the sentence is just as appropriate as the finding of guilt. The wife spent 2 1/2 years facilitating Defendant's violation of the order. She testified to experiencing no actual threats from Defendant during all that time, and only felt (subjectively) threatened by the latter-day presence of firearms. When given an opportunity to make a statement, the word from her that the prosecutor passed along to the Judge was: no jail time. (And aren't judges supposed to be taking "victim impact" into serious consideration now?) Further, with a conviction now on his record, Ohio apparently makes any further PPO violations felonies, so that's hanging over Defendant's head in the future. So, the Judge was appropriately bound to convict the Defendant, but the "slap on the wrist" as a sentence seems appropriate under the circumstances.
58:19 wow this guy just doesn’t get it. It doesn’t matter what she wants. The law says no stay away. Imo the state did the right thing to bring the charges. Great case as usual.
ok so he has an alcohol problem. Any substance issuer is very much controlled by the substance. Why was she taking care of that child all his life? Did he turn to alcohol after his wife died or was he abusing it prior? If so why did she marry him? What was her situation prior to that? Too many open ?s Why was a PPO order given, it must have been serious. I think not having a lawyer in court is about the most stupid thing that anyone can do. I believe lawyers can take retainers and get paid on a payment plan or something. He still needs to seek legal resources so that he can try and rectify his current situation
"I think not having a lawyer in court is about the most stupid thing that anyone can do. I believe lawyers can take retainers and get paid on a payment plan or something." As an attorney myself, I can't help but agree that having the advice of counsel is a big help. However, the chances of getting a *decent* lawyer to allow some sort of "payment plan" for their fee is slim to none. Lawyers want their fees paid up front, for the overwhelming majority of non-contingency cases. Also, you seem to have one common misconception about what a "retainer" is in the practice of law. A retainer is not a "down payment." A retainer is payment of the *entire fee* that the lawyer expects to charge for a particular case. Now, since Defendant was facing possible jail time here, he was entitled to counsel. I think it's reasonable to bet that this Defendant had too much income to qualify for appointed counsel. On the other hand, it's one thing to have too much income for appointed counsel; it's entirely another to actually come up with the up-front thousands of dollars to hire a lawyer. All of that said, though, if Defendant had paid a couple hundred dollars to get some legal advice back in April, *before* signing a new lease with the Wife, that would have been helpful. The lawyer could have told him everything that he learned after this trial from the Prosecuter and the Judge, (i.e. it makes no difference if the Wife "allowed" the violations to occur) but without having all the effort, having been arrested, and now having a conviction on his record. Some people can only learn their lessons the hard way. 🤷♂
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
Now they have a record. And if she gets back with him again, he'll likely only get another fine if she tells on him. If he hurts her? There's a record of this violation. Time for him to collect his son, file a motion for his personal items, and move on-even if she says come back. No, go away. No, come back....
Didn’t know the 8 year anniversary present was a bench trial 😒
What? The judge only gave him a fine of $250? He may as well as not fined him at all, should have just said: you are guilty of violating the PPO, stay away from your wife, that's it, have a nice day. Lame as heck. It solves the immediate issue (assuming he does stay away), but no punishment for clearly violating the PPO, and violated it by having GUNS! A big no-no if you are the respondent in a protective order. Not a problem according the judge, he can have his guns in 2026, easy-peazy.
spoiler alert
IMHO the sentence is just as appropriate as the finding of guilt. The wife spent 2 1/2 years facilitating Defendant's violation of the order. She testified to experiencing no actual threats from Defendant during all that time, and only felt (subjectively) threatened by the latter-day presence of firearms. When given an opportunity to make a statement, the word from her that the prosecutor passed along to the Judge was: no jail time. (And aren't judges supposed to be taking "victim impact" into serious consideration now?) Further, with a conviction now on his record, Ohio apparently makes any further PPO violations felonies, so that's hanging over Defendant's head in the future. So, the Judge was appropriately bound to convict the Defendant, but the "slap on the wrist" as a sentence seems appropriate under the circumstances.
Am I the only one who imagines Krissy sitting on the floor in her living room with a Judge George doll and a Judge Mogen doll making them kiss?
Yup. You’re the only one.
@@CourtWithKrissy Dang it.
58:19 wow this guy just doesn’t get it. It doesn’t matter what she wants. The law says no stay away. Imo the state did the right thing to bring the charges. Great case as usual.
Thanks! It bothers me when the petitioner gets a PPO but continues to communicate and see the respondent.
ok so he has an alcohol problem. Any substance issuer is very much controlled by the substance. Why was she taking care of that child all his life? Did he turn to alcohol after his wife died or was he abusing it prior? If so why did she marry him? What was her situation prior to that? Too many open ?s Why was a PPO order given, it must have been serious. I think not having a lawyer in court is about the most stupid thing that anyone can do. I believe lawyers can take retainers and get paid on a payment plan or something. He still needs to seek legal resources so that he can try and rectify his current situation
He definitely needs a lawyer(s) besides this case…. landlord tenant case & family law case!
"I think not having a lawyer in court is about the most stupid thing that anyone can do. I believe lawyers can take retainers and get paid on a payment plan or something." As an attorney myself, I can't help but agree that having the advice of counsel is a big help. However, the chances of getting a *decent* lawyer to allow some sort of "payment plan" for their fee is slim to none. Lawyers want their fees paid up front, for the overwhelming majority of non-contingency cases. Also, you seem to have one common misconception about what a "retainer" is in the practice of law. A retainer is not a "down payment." A retainer is payment of the *entire fee* that the lawyer expects to charge for a particular case. Now, since Defendant was facing possible jail time here, he was entitled to counsel. I think it's reasonable to bet that this Defendant had too much income to qualify for appointed counsel. On the other hand, it's one thing to have too much income for appointed counsel; it's entirely another to actually come up with the up-front thousands of dollars to hire a lawyer. All of that said, though, if Defendant had paid a couple hundred dollars to get some legal advice back in April, *before* signing a new lease with the Wife, that would have been helpful. The lawyer could have told him everything that he learned after this trial from the Prosecuter and the Judge, (i.e. it makes no difference if the Wife "allowed" the violations to occur) but without having all the effort, having been arrested, and now having a conviction on his record. Some people can only learn their lessons the hard way. 🤷♂
@@SamT987 I think I had heard Judge Fleischer? say that lawyers take payment plans. I have no experience and I hope for it to stay that way