Started By
Message
re: Tiger Rag goes full commie and publishes Coach O's 1992 restraining order
Posted on 4/7/21 at 11:59 am to lsufball19
Posted on 4/7/21 at 11:59 am to lsufball19
quote:
If the petition is granted, a “permanent” order is put into place, but “permanent” doesn’t necessarily mean forever. Looks like Orgeron’s motioned the court to dissolve the order after a year had passed and that motion was granted, likely as a matter of law.
This is likely what happened, his move back to Louisiana likely helped his motion.
0
Posted on 4/7/21 at 11:59 am to TidalSurge1
quote:
That's arse backwards. A protection order should remain in place indefinitely, The burden and expense of getting it rescinded should fall on the restrained party.
This is my area of law I practice and I can tell you protection orders are abused more than anything I see on a daily basis. Some judges grant these things without good cause all the time. What’s arse backwards is how many other rights these things affect and how seemingly easy they can be to get sometimes. They’re used as leverage in divorce and custody situations all the damn time.
I watched a kid get one entered against him. He was in NY his girlfriend in TN. She broke up with him via text message. All he did was plead with her not to break up with him like 20 year olds tend to do. She asked him to stop contacting her. He tried calling her once, she didn’t answer. A protection order was granted for....stalking.
This post was edited on 4/7/21 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 4/7/21 at 11:59 am to lsufball19
quote:
Permanent probably doesn’t mean what you think it does. When you petition the court for a protection order, typically an ex parte temporary protection order is put in place until there is a hearing. A hearing is then required within 15 days of the temp order being entered. If the petition is granted, a “permanent” order is put into place, but “permanent” doesn’t necessarily mean forever. Looks like Orgeron’s motioned the court to dissolve the order after a year had passed and that motion was granted, likely as a matter of law.
Thank you for dropping some actual legal knowledge in this trolltastic shitstorm.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:00 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
That's arse backwards. A protection order should remain in place indefinitely, The burden and expense of getting it rescinded should fall on the restrained party, not on the protected victim to extend the order.
These are the guidelines in Florida:
quote:
“Final judgments” for protection against violence, commonly known as “permanent injunctions,” remain in effect until modified or dissolved by the court. Therefore, at the court’s discretion, the injunction may be indefinite or expire on a date certain. Petitioners should request the duration of the injunction they are seeking at the time of final hearing.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:06 pm to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
We can try and see
It's good that you admit that you live in your sister's trailer.
Acceptance is an important step in The Process.
Just remember the most important step in The Process:
Stay the frick away from Uncle Tommy.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:08 pm to SidewalkTiger
Its relevant because it proves a pattern of behavior. Not looking good for O or LSU
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:10 pm to deltaland
quote:
Its relevant because it proves a pattern of behavior. Not looking good for O or LSU
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:12 pm to deltaland
quote:
Its relevant because it proves a pattern of behavior. Not looking good for O or LSU
I know it’s time to pile onto LSU right now but a protection order entered almost 20 years before Orgeron ever worked at LSU that is a matter of public record does not show a pattern of LSU trying to cover up sexual misconduct. His prior criminal charges/convictions aren’t even admissible at this point in a court of law. And if your stance is it shows a pattern they didn’t care about his past, well neither did the Saints, USC, Ole Miss, Tennessee, etc
I also think there are a lot of SOL concerns with Sharon Lewis’ lawsuit.
This post was edited on 4/7/21 at 12:19 pm
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:13 pm to BrerTiger
dude let me tell you something. it is so fricking easy to go your whole life with out a restraining order that to get one on you is pathetic.
you all are clearly backing these dudes are clearly basement swelling fricks with no daughter or hope even hope of having kids
you all are clearly backing these dudes are clearly basement swelling fricks with no daughter or hope even hope of having kids
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:19 pm to BrerTiger
I just hate to see Special ED and LSU get drug through the mud like this!
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:21 pm to Miznoz
quote:
you all are clearly backing these dudes
So did USC, Ole Miss and Tennessee among others.
Nothing that was published today was new news. It's just the actual court documents.
Ed's troubles in 91/92 were already well known.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:30 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
Acceptance is an important step in The Process.
Again, I'd be more worried over the process these many investigations are undertaking than what some poster thinks.
But then y'all certainly didn't get here by being intelligent.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:30 pm to BrerTiger
Catholics vs. Convicts was more real than we originally thought.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:32 pm to FourThreeForty
quote:
Catholics vs. Convicts was more real than we originally thought.
Did you miss the whole aspect of UM players robbing students?
I still went to the games
This post was edited on 4/7/21 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:49 pm to lsufball19
quote:
His prior criminal charges/convictions aren’t even admissible at this point in a court of law.
They absolutely are admissible. Say he commits another DV, absolutely will be used against him. Gets found with a firearm, the lautenberg amendment will do him in.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:51 pm to MoarKilometers
Better just drive on past this train wreck
Posted on 4/7/21 at 12:58 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
The original order was a permanent injunction that was later rescinded.
Hey sidewalk lawyer... why does this court document have an expiration date of 5-7-92 on the protective order? I thought it was permanent.
Posted on 4/7/21 at 1:01 pm to MoarKilometers
quote:
Hey sidewalk lawyer... why does this court document have an expiration date of 5-7-92 on the protective order? I thought it was permanent.
Thats the technical term for it.
In Florida, a permanent injunction is valid forever unless otherwise stated by the court.
Also, because I'm a sidewalk lawyer
Posted on 4/7/21 at 1:18 pm to BrerTiger
GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY!
Posted on 4/7/21 at 1:22 pm to MoarKilometers
quote:
Gets found with a firearm, the lautenberg amendment will do him in.
Unless I missed it, he was never convicted of domestic violence, and the protection order was rescinded in 1992. He's good to go under that law.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News