Well, a recent Washington case cemented Washington’s law recognizing coercive control as pretty much a single basis for issuing a domestic violence protection order. Coercive control is a pattern of controlling, manipulative behavior; it does not have to include physical actions (i.e. assault) towards another. Coercive control is defined under RCW 7.105.010(4)(a) as a pattern of behavior used to cause another person physical, emotional, or psychological harm that, in purpose or effect, unreasonably interferes with that person’s free will and personal liberty. In Asbach v. Couto, No. 60325-0-II, the court upheld protection orders based primarily on coercive control The court also clarified the limits on what a protection order may restrain.
Ashbach v. Couto arose out of a long history between a former couple who divorced many years earlier. As part of that divorce, the petitioner obtained a permanent restraining order based on domestic violence, and the parenting plan limited the other party’s contact with the children because of conflict deemed abusive.
After one of the couple’s children turned 18 (and his protection order expired) the father posted a public video to YouTube addressed directly to the son. In it, he made disparaging statements about the child’s mother. The mother petitioned for a new protection order for herself and to renew the order for the couple’s other child; the 18-year-old also filed his own petition, citing the video and incidents in which the father appeared at the child’s workplace and at a store where the other child was present.
The trial court granted the protection orders, finding that the YouTube video and surrounding conduct amounted to coercive control. On appeal, the lower court’s ruling was affirmed because there was substantial evidence supporting a finding of coercive control. In making its ruling the court relied on the “context” theory. That is to say that the YouTube video criticizing the former spouse combined with additional documented history of physical violence, financial control, and emotional manipulation amounted to coercive control; the video was viewed by the court as a continuation of an established pattern of abusive behavior and it found that type of patterned behavior was, in fact, coercive control. Clearly, the ruling broadened what may be deemed unlawful behavior warranting the issuance of a domestic violence protection order in Washington State.
These days, as one can see, it doesn’t take much for a court to issue a domestic violence protection order. It should also be pointed out that once a court deems a domestic violence protection order necessary, the responding party is very likely going to be ordered to pay the petitioner’s legal fees, which could be in the thousands of dollars.
If you or a loved one is in a bind as a result of a criminal allegation, immediately contact a Seattle Criminal Attorney. A Seattle Criminal Defense Attorney is not going to judge you and understands that everyone makes mistakes. Hiring a Seattle Criminal Lawyer to help can – at a minimum – reduce penalties and can help direct people on how to best deal with their criminal charge, and sometimes even get them dismissed. So, it should go without saying that someone cited for a crime should hire a qualified Seattle criminal lawyer as soon as possible. Criminal charges can cause havoc on a person’s personal and professional life. Anyone charged with a criminal case in Washington State should immediately seek the assistance of a seasoned Seattle Criminal Lawyer. SQ Attorneys can be reached at (425) 359-3791 and/or (206) 441-0900.
