The Insane Camden County (NJ) Arrest Warrant for an “Indefinite” Temporary Restraining Order Violation

camden-county-prosecutor-logoIn my last post, I wrote about the outrageous “Indefinite” Temporary Restraining Order issued against Bruce Aristeo by the Camden County Superior Court of New Jersey to “protect” alleged “stalking victim” Jody Raines.

As predicted and written by legal scholar, Aaron H. Caplan, in his legal paper, “Free Speech and Civil Harassment Orders”, once a wrongful and extremely flawed restraining order (initially a civil matter) is in put into place, it can then be unfairly and illicitly used as a stepping stone transforming it into a criminal matter:

“A civil harassment order creates a new crime that can only be committed by the respondent. Actions that would otherwise be lawful—such as attending a school sporting event or placing a telephone call—become potentially criminal. Even if no criminal prosecution follows, other less extreme but nonetheless perilous legal consequences exist. The issuance of a past harassment order can be a factor in favor of issuing a new order. A judge in an unrelated criminal proceeding would be allowed to consider the existence of an earlier harassment order as an indicator of dangerousness, potentially affecting decisions on bail or sentencing.”

Aaron H. Caplan also predicted enforcement errors by police.

“Officers who investigate alleged violations of no-contact orders may make unjustified arrests (or unjustified oral orders to move along) resulting from inattention, misinterpretation, or lack of accurate information. Several federal civil rights actions have been filed against police for arrests made when any reasonable reading of the order would show no violation.”

And that, unfortunately, is exactly what has happened to Bruce Aristeo. Below is a copy of an insane arrest warrant issued against Bruce filed by Police Detective Christoph Auletto

.

For reading convenience, I have pasted below the core text (with spelling corrections) from the arrest warrant (BOLD is my emphasis):

Within the jurisdiction of this Court, on diverse dates between on or about January 2, 2013 through May 15, 2013, did purposefully or knowingly engage in a course of conduct directed at Jody Raines that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or the safety of a third person or suffer other emotional distress, specifically by posting numerous inflammatory videos on public internet sites using Jody Raines’ name, image, photographs, business website, as well as friends and acquaintances of Jody Raines and did so in violation of an Indefinite Temporary Restraining Order issued August 2, 2012, by the Honorable Nan S. Famular, J.S.C. under Docket Number FV-04-001476-12-B, in violation of N.J.S. 2C:12-10C, a 3rd degree crime.

Within the jurisdiction of this Court, on or about April 25, 2013, did purposely or knowingly violate a provision of an Indefinite Temporary Restraining Order issued August 2, 2012. by the Honorable Nan S. Famular. J.S.C. under docket number FV-04-001476-12-B, by engaging in a course of conduct directed at Jody Raines that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or suffer other emotional distress by posting two inflammatory videos on YouTube, a public internet site, using Jody Raines’ name, image, and video of her pet Belgian Malinois in violation of N.J.S. 2C:29-9B, a fourth degree crime.

Since when is a restraining order allowed to prevent a person from talking ABOUT someone else such as “friends and acquaintances” of an alleged harassment victim (Jody Raines)?

Next up, I will post links to some of the “inflammatory” videos that allegedly caused the “victim” (Jody Raines) to “suffer emotional distress” and “fear for her safety”. You will also see the “inflammatory” videos displaying “Jody Raines’ name, image, photographs, business website” that supposedly violates the Indefinite Temporary Restraining Order. I promise, you won’t be disappointed.

=====

Follow Defiantly on Twitter at http://twitter.com/defiantlynet or the Defiantly Facebook Fan Page at http://facebook.com/defiantly.net. Subscribe by Email to the Defiantly Blog in the Blue Box in the Upper Right Corner.

=====

About Matthew Chan 103 Articles

Matthew is the Publisher and Editor of Defiantly.net. He is also the Founder, Editor, and Host for ExtortionLetterInfo.com. Matthew is the author of several business books & audio programs. He is an entrepreneur, real estate investor, and First Amendment advocate.

4 Comments

      • Not for me they weren’t. The restraining order applications I could not shake because they are designed by evil mutts to be overpowering, at least here in NC and in most other states. I appealed until I was blue in the face and found that our appellate courts in North Carolina are infested with scoundrels.

        Matthew, you should be glad you drew the panel in Georgia that you were fortunate enough to have hear your appeal. I watched those judges. They understood 1A. It didn’t take long to figure out they were going to sh*tcan Linda Ellis’s malicious restraining order. On top of that you had a dream team representing you. And they knew they had a case they could not lose.

        As soon as the plaintiff in my case, Marty Tackitt-Grist, began trying to have me jailed with show-cause orders — 4 times — the cases became criminal. Because of the transition from civil to criminal I was entitled to enhanced due process and discovery, so I used discovery tools and exposed her for the lying skank she is, and she failed all 4 times. I had the crafty old perjuress cornered, and the last time I had her cornered she ran to a lawyer and this was a real shyster who steered the case to a crooked judge at the very time he was running for re-election. The judge, Eddie Clontz, illegally permitted Grist to escape Discovery — interrogatories and Requests for Admission of Facts and Genuineness of Documents. Despite this corrupt judge, Grist still failed. And her attorney finally dumped her, from what I have heard because she did not pay her attorney fee.

        Altogether this unimaginably evil woman tried a total of 6 times to have me jailed. She failed all 6 times. The 2 criminal cases she initiated were cyberstalking warrants. Both of them were dismissed, one by the DA who tried like hell to steer me into a trap; and then the second cyberstalking warrant was dismissed by the judge at the end of Martha Grist’s testimony. She had been caught at multiple counts of perjury, and the judge dismissed the charge and gave her a scathing rebuke, saying she had dirty hands. By her own admission she committed perjury, but no one ever gets indicted for it. (What’s the use for the oath?)

        I felt like a martyr when all of these stressful attempts against my freedom and peace of mind were over with. (I hope they’re over.) But my troubles could not come close to atrocities worked on Louis Gonzales III and Bruce Aristeo.

        • Up until recently, I had never personally seen up close a civil restraining order case become a criminal one. It has been very eye-opening and educational unfortunately, at Bruce’s expense. I can say that Bruce has been transparent and gracious in my very pointed and assertive interviews with him. He answers the hard questions.

          I agree with you that what most of us have gone through pales in comparison to what Bruce has been through.

          I cannot speak for Bruce but I think he realizes that his case is more than about himself. Win, lose, or draw, the world is now watching. The genie is out of the bottle. It is incredulous how long Jody Raines and Camden County have been able to keep Bruce’s story contained.

4 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. The Greatly Unjust Grand Jury Indictment of Bruce Aristeo by Camden County, NJ » Defiantly News & Commentaries by Matthew Valor
  2. How False Testimony Is Concealed: What an Unconstitutional “Prior Restraint” Looks Like | TALKING BACK to restraining orders
  3. If a Judge Has Unlawfully Ordered You Never to Speak or Write ABOUT Someone, Matthew Chan Wants to Tell Your Story | TALKING BACK to restraining orders
  4. “Some Results Have Been Removed”: Search Engine Censorship of Bloggers Who Write about Legal Abuse | TALKING BACK to restraining orders

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*