GLENDALE, CA – Judge Timothy Saito denied Deputy Public Defender Adele Giraud’s request for the lifting of a Criminal Protective Order (CPO) of the accused here in a pretrial hearing at Los Angeles County Superior Court’s Glendale Courthouse this week.
The accused, facing domestic violence charges, asked to have the order lifted because the accused’s girlfriend was not able to find childcare and subsequently risked losing her job.
The accused tried to enroll in numerous domestic violence rehabilitation courses after the charges, but could not because of the court’s failure to provide a referral, said the defense.
Deputy District Attorney Arlene Anderson cited the accused’s failure to enroll in these courses as necessary to have the CPO lifted. The judge affirmed this.
The accused, said the prosecution, has a long-term girlfriend with whom he has three children. While the two live separately, he was at her house one day with the children present.
His girlfriend turned off a sports program in the middle of his watching it, at which point he allegedly lost his temper, hitting her with a broomstick and causing abrasions to her shoulder and arm.
The accused faces a misdemeanor charge for domestic violence, as well as a CPO for his girlfriend and children. He also has a GPS on him at all times to monitor his location.
DPD Giraud raised the issue of the girlfriend’s employment, noting she plans to start a new job next week that would require child care between 5 p.m. and 1 a.m. for the young children. DPD Giraud explained the girlfriend has been searching for alternative options and social services, but that the accused is the only person available during those hours that could watch them.
The defense also explained that, without child care, the accused’s girlfriend would be unable to accept her new position and be forced to quit. Without income, especially with the burden of the accused no longer being home, the girlfriend would likely be forced into homelessness.
DPD Giraud requested the CPO—that prevents the accused from being near the girlfriend—to be completely lifted. The girlfriend promised to call the police at the sight of any further aggression and she wished for the charges to be dropped.
DDA Anderson said the girlfriend is likely to be talked out of calling again, and that it is too early for the two to be allowed to cohabitate or even interact. Anderson also argued the accused’s failure to register in domestic violence courses after the original charges points to the necessity of the CPO.
DPD Giraud claimed the accused had tried numerous times to enroll in such counseling courses. However, she said it required a referral from the court, which the judge had failed to provide. She said the accused is making efforts toward rehabilitation despite such obstacles.
Judge Saito refused to lift the CPO, noting the accused’s failure to enroll in domestic violence courses as justification, stating “there are patterns that occur in these types of cases” where families are “financially strapped,” and that without correction the cycle would continue. He issued a referral for domestic violence courses for the accused.
DPD Giraud appealed one more time for the judge to modify the CPO to a Peaceful Contact Order (PCO). The PCO would allow for the accused to take care of the children for the duration of the girlfriend’s shifts and to see the girlfriend for the children’s drop-offs.
Prosecutor Anderson maintained her original objections, adding “the safety of her and the kids is the number one focus at this time.” The judge agreed, and again denied the defense request.
The judge set a hearing for three weeks from the pre-trial, and indicated that successful enrollment in mental health and domestic violence services would “be looked favorably upon” by the court in reconsidering the CPO. He said the accused should “work positively” until the next hearing, and view the present ruling as a “good step.”
