Doggone Paddy

Men who are forced to separate from their wives or partners, via court protection orders ....

Pets Are Often Caught In The Middle Of Divorces

 .... because of their violence, will often either breach the order, or try others methods to contact their ex-partner. because its all about control.

Usually their motive is either to intimidate their ex into not proceeding with court actions against them for the violence inflicted, or to try and persuade them that if they get back together they will not never commit an act of control or violence against them again (which is of course the women would be wise to ignore). 

Because of course its a lie .... once they start to exert psychological control or start to beat you and get away with it, they will do it again, they carry on until the woman is completely terrorised into submission to their will, or is dead .... control is the primary reason. They are controllers by nature, but can't control men or others, as they are usually in low prestige jobs, or unemployed, so they dominate a woman, who they claim that they love. 

However, occasionally these sorry cases (like most people, I can't understand why the women often take the intimidation or violence over and over again), throw up a little lighter story.

Dear Rex Letter To Bypass Court Order

An unnamed Irishman, who was subject to a three year safety order granted in April 2022, preventing him contacting or communicating with his ex-wife, was taken to court for breaching the order in May and June 2022. He had been sending letters and food parcels to the family dog, which was living with his ex-wife, and even signing some of them "Woof Woof". The letters bizarrely included a copy of the Irish Constitution (presumably because the Irish Constitution banned divorce from 1937 until 1996. The ban was lifted after a referendum in 1995),  as well as €80 for dog grooming. 

80 Euro's For The Dog

When taken before a judge, he informed him that he hadn't breached the order because the dog was half his, as well as half his ex-wife's and that he wasn’t doing it “out of malice.” His ex-wife pointed out that he had sent the €80 for the dog, but “This was the same man who wouldn’t give me one single penny in maintenance.” She said she had been subjected to a campaign of harassment from him. 

The Judge responded to the mans statements by saying that "I am not at all satisfied those letters should ever have been sent," which was something of an understatement. He proceeded to point out to the man that his dog couldn't read, and never would be able to read, therefore, it could be inferred that the ex-wife would have to read the letters to the dog ..... therefore the letters could be seen as intimidatory. 

The Irish press did follow up with a report of the sentencing, which took place in February 2024 .... Judge Gabbett handed down a two-month prison sentence (suspended), and a €200 fine (£171 or $232), leaving the man with an official criminal record. Upon hearing the verdict, the man vowed to appeal the decision all the way to the Supreme Court .... a pity, as the man should have just accepted being sent to the dog house.