What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

[PlanB]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Sorry PB - changed it because it wasn't right - and maybe still isn't. Just want to do better by Freddie because I feel we've collectively let him down. x

Not again - I can't keep up with you :typing:

Seriously though, I agree with you that we may have been a bit harsh on Freddie but he didn't stike me as someone who would be intimidated by forthright women :fear:

[MissFM]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Golly, I can't keep up with the way you guys post, then delete your posts, and then re-post something completely different, while I'm busy trying to reply to the original post which has now vanished :eek2:

Yes - sorry PB

[MissFM]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Not again - I can't keep up with you :typing:

Seriously though, I agree with you that we may have been a bit harsh on Freddie but he didn't stike me as someone who would be intimidated by forthright women :fear:

But just an off-thread tetchy quicky - "you guys"? doh? I only slightly edited one post (a new skill for me) - to say the same only clearer and less personal And he does seem that kind of guy. xx

[CleverClogs]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

By no stretch of the imagination, given the most liberal of interpretations, did the OP say that in his first post. Complying with the court order would be easy. What he asked for was advice on how to break it without apparently seeming to do so, and whether the fact that it wasn't against a third party meant that he was allowed to harass that third party. Not even remotely the same thing as how to comply with the order.

As nobody seems to have suggested it yet, I suppose I must...
It would probably be quite lawful, under the terms of that order, for freddie to molest himself.

[labman]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

I have no expertise in this area, so not being able to offer CONSTRUCTIVE help i prefer to let others assist.

Not again - I can't keep up with you :typing:

Seriously though, I agree with you that we may have been a bit harsh on Freddie but he didn't stike me as someone who would be intimidated by forthright women :fear:

I'm glad I have a soulmate Plan B. I often go to type a response. I post it up, fully expecting it to sit neatly in line, only to find it's the best part of a page further on with 5 or 6 posts having already been made, and mine is left looking totally out of context.

[labman]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

See what I mean? lol

[Inca]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Can I just say IMHO,,it matters not (certainly to me) where a post ends up,I will find it and read it because it's invariably good sound advice ( normally a different perspective that I may not have thought of)

I keep saying it,,LB is made up of a myriad of people,qualified and nonqualified,who give their time and advice freely and without predjudice,,and those who choose to ridicule it should really go and play in another playpen.

[Eloise01]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

It strikes me that some posters here firmly misunderstand what this forum is for, and what "advice" is. And can routinely change their opinion on these matters at the drop of a hat depending on which point of view they wish to believe today.

The fora at Legal Beagles do not restrict people to giving advice - if that were the case then there should be no discussion, no debate and no threads on any issues that are not queries for advice. Nobody should be allowed to comment on any matter upon which they are not qualified to comment; advice should be monitored for content and quality; and some of the people who currently post comments, advice and suggestions on this site would never be allowed to do so. Others would only be allowed to post on matters for which they were qualified to comment. That is the manner is which "advice agencies" operate - they have no view whatsoever about their clients or conduct, and are legally liable for the advice that is given. Legal Beagles is not such an agency - people do not get a guarantee on what will be said, the professional expertise of people who tell them things, nor the accuracy of their "advice". I have personally seen "advice" on this site that is legally incorrect, and passed off as fact - I have said so too, but in the end, posters decide for themselves what they wish to believe, and if they take advice that is wrong, then that is their decision. Now you may make of that what you will, and you may think that that is what should happen or not - but it is the fact of Legal Beagles, and if that is not what you signed up for then you should decide whether it is for you or not. If you want to be part of something that restricts itself to narrow interpretations of advice - and there is nothing wrong with that - I believe Citizens Advice are always desperately short of volunteers. If you are a member here, or post here, that is not what you are getting. I find it fascinating that at least one person here criticising others for "passing judgement" has quite recently made comments arguing that my opinions are, and I quote, "logical ********" whilst simultaneously posting a whole load of opinions themselves - so not incapable of passing judgement themselves when they wish to!

There is also no clear definition of what advice consists of - and on some subjects any advice is going to be subject to context and there will be different views of what the right advice would be. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone who is effectively asserting that he has rights over his wife and her conduct and making a series of clear judgements about her conduct that are moral judgements and not legal judgements is going to encounter alternative views, and that some of those views are going to express the opinion that his views are perhaps responsible for his circumstances. Contrary to what has been stated here, the OP did not come here seeking advice on how to comply with the NMO. He clearly stated that he wanted advice on how to break it without appearing to do so. He asked if he could order his wife out of the marital home provided he did so "in a reasonable voice" because he wanted to - and please do not try to tell me that he genuinely believed that doing so would not be "molestation" or unlawful behaviour. Or that he thought "going after" the boyfriend would be ok because he wasn't covered by the NMO. A NMO is put in place by a court, not as a preventative measure, but as a measure to protect someone from exhibited behaviour which is unacceptable and which, in the courts view, a person is incapable of adhering to without an order. Behaviour such as "going after" people and attempting to intimidate them into leaving their home. The OP says he has done none of these things (despite actually asking whether he could now do them). A court says differently. The OP's expressed opinions about his wifes conduct, and what he will and will not allow his daughters to do or see, are nothing but opinions. And they are opinions that are out of step with the law and with the opinions of lots of other people. If the OP cannot see that, then he is missing some fairly obvious truths about modern life. The marriage contract is not legally binding on anyone - we no longer hang or stone adulterers, and if we did there would be a serious drop in the population of the UK. It is not against the law to have an affair, or to stop loving your spouse. And if you wish to "vent" about it then fine - but you will find that there are people who simply do not agree with your attitudes. Positive suggestions were made about counselling; about considering the effect this was having on the children and acting in a civilised manner to protect them; about considering whether an attitude that is indicative of "owning" his wife and daughters is contributing to the problem. The OP was very clear - he wants to make his wife respect him and make his daughters look up to him and his moral opinions. That is simply not possible. Once upon a time you could have made "your women" act in the way you wanted. No more, and thank God for that.

So no, I do not agree that that anyone has been "let down" by the advice they have had. And if they simply want to hear what they want to hear, and be told what they want to be told, then airing thier views on a public forum is not the way to have that happen. I, for one, am never going to sit back and keep silent whilst a man (or a woman for that matter) argues that they have instrinsic rights to dictate the conduct of their spouse for no other reason than that they are married to them. I will not support intimidation (no matter how reasonable the tone of voice) or violence against a spouse (no matter what the excuse). And anyone who thinks that these are appropriate ways to conduct matters will get my "advice" that they are not.

[CleverClogs]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

The OP was very clear - he wants to make his wife respect him and make his daughters look up to him and his moral opinions. That is simply not possible. Once upon a time you could have made "your women" act in the way you wanted. No more, and thank God for that.

But would all women reject the idea of a strong, dominant man taking care of them and, yes, telling them how to behave?

I, for one, am never going to sit back and keep silent whilst a man (or a woman for that matter) argues that they have intrinsic rights to dictate the conduct of their spouse for no other reason than that they are married to them.

Even if, in her marriage vows, she had sworn to love, honour and obey her husband?

Or does that count for naught these days?

I will not support intimidation (no matter how reasonable the tone of voice) or violence against a spouse (no matter what the excuse). And anyone who thinks that these are appropriate ways to conduct matters will get my "advice" that they are not.

I agree there, but could the OP lawfully communicate through his lawyer with the adulterous strumpet to whom he is still married, to tell her to make up her mind? Could the lawyer tell that trollop to ditch her fancy man and try to make the marriage work, or just get out of her husband's house and out of her husband's life?

[Inca]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Had 'OBEY' taken out of my wedding vows.........

[wales01man]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

I think the marriage vows of love honour and obey together with till death us to part are a bit outdated now and this thread has somewhat drifted away from Freddies post i can see why he has not returned we can all read different things from his post what is needed is him to return then the issues he raises can be dealt with .We can all guess at what he may or may not do but lets all hope he does it within the law

[labman]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Can I just say IMHO,,it matters not (certainly to me) where a post ends up,I will find it and read it because it's invariably good sound advice ( normally a different perspective that I may not have thought of)

I keep saying it,,LB is made up of a myriad of people,qualified and nonqualified,who give their time and advice freely and without predjudice,,and those who choose to ridicule it should really go and play in another playpen.

Please may I ask, in order to avoid any misunderstanding, at whom, if anyone specifically, this comment was aimed?

I ask as the first part appears to relate directly to my post. I wondered if the second part is also aimed at me?

Thanks

[Inca]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Nope,,not at you labs,,wasn't thinking of anyone when i wrote it,,except people that come on here to get advice then cos it's not what they want to hear,they rip it to shreds

[CleverClogs]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

Had 'OBEY' taken out of my wedding vows.........

Very wise. :rofl:

[wales01man]

Re: What can I do under a Non-Molestation order?

My wife wouldnt let me remove OBEY from my vows only heres DURR?