Civil Restraining Order Request, Torrance, Dismissed

Our client, age 18, was dating another student at his high school.  She was 17.  The relationship soured and she broke up with our client, who really did not care too much about this.  He then went on to college at El Camino and she continued going to high school.

She apparently came to regret the breakup and, starting in August 2022, tried to get back together with our client, but our client ignored her.  She now became irate and determined to tarnish his reputation in any and every way she could.  The situation seemed to exemplify the cliché that “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”

When our client ignored her, she compiled a list of over 50 instances where our client was allegedly cyber-stalking her through anonymous postings on her Instagram and Snapchat.  She documented instances of “harassment” from our client where “anonymous” people viewed her profile, “added her” on Snapchat, an anonymous poster asked her for money on Cashapp, anonymous texts threatening to send videos “to her school” and anonymous messages asked her to verify accounts.  As none of the authors or originators of such texts had any names, she assumed they were our client and told this to the judge.  She felt harassed by such messages, etc.

She set forth this alleged harassment in filing a Petition for a Civil Restraining Order against our client in the Torrance Superior Court.  She then had our client served with the document.

The client received this and showed it to his father, who called Greg Hill & Associates.  The father discussed the petition and the vague claims with Greg.  The father wanted to know, first and foremost, if his son could go to jail over this.

Greg explained that no, his son would not face jail time over a civil restraining order, if it were granted.

Greg explained, however, that if his son were to violate the order, then such conduct can be regarded as criminal and he indeed could face jail time.

Greg then spoke with the 18-year old client and asked him if he had sent any of the anonymous messages to his former girlfriend.  Our client said no.  Greg also discussed the lengthy list of alleged cyber stalking that the former girlfriend alleged and remarked that it sounded just like spam e-mails from advertisers and the normal identity thieves seeking personal information via email and texts.  The client agreed.

The client also described how his former girlfriend had further told people at her school, once school reconvened, that our client was in jail for harassing her.  Our client learned of this through his younger brother, who attended the same high school as our client’s ex-girlfriend, as people asked the younger brother if such stories were true.

The irony of her claiming our client was stalking her while she spread rumors and sought a judicial finding of cyber-stalking, when our client did nothing, was quite clear.

On the day of the hearing, Greg asked for a continuance of the hearing because the former girlfriend had allegedly contacted the police to report our client’s cyberstalking.  While Greg believed the police would not take such a report seriously, in an abundance of caution, Greg asked the judge to continue the hearing 90 to 120 days under the Fifth Amendment and Pacers, Inc. v. Superior Court (1984) 162 Cal. 

App.3d 686, just in case any testimony from our client defending himself in the civil restraining order could be used against him in the criminal case to prove the criminal case.

The judge agreed and continued the hearing for 120 days.

After 120 days and with no criminal case filed, Greg and the client appeared again in the Torrance Superior Court.  At this point, our client had had no further contact with his ex-girlfriend and Greg explained this to the judge, as it showed no restraining order was necessary to protect the ex-girlfriend.

Greg further argued that of all the alleged cyber-stalking by our client, there was no foundation that even one of the texts, messages on various social media websites or anything else actually originated from our client.  There was no way to authenticate anything as being originated from our client.  The judge agreed and explained this to the ex-girlfriend, apologetically telling her that not one of her claims had any credibility as involving our client.

The ex-girlfriend understood this and the judge dismissed her request for a restraining order, making our client very happy.

For more information about issues arising in civil restraining order cases, please click on the following articles: