Non-violent orders challenged

Rebecca Berfanger
January 1, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence with the assistance of pro bono attorneys in Baker & Daniels' Indianapolis office filed notice of appeal July 22 for two non-violent contact orders issued in Marion County. The non-violent distinction means that the respondent can have contact with the petitioner as long as it isn't violent contact.

Earlier on the same day in Indianapolis, Carl Wills allegedly killed his ex-wife, April Wills, her boyfriend, and then killed himself. Records show that Carl had a history of violence and had previously threatened to kill himself and April, who had a non-violent contact order against him based on previous violent events involving Carl.

"Essentially, we are all under a 'non-violent protection order' as citizens of a civilized society," ICADV Legal Director Kerry Hyatt Blomquist said.

The ICADV is appealing the non-violent contact orders because, Blomquist said, these types of orders are not authorized by Indiana Code Section 34-26-5, the Indiana Civil Protective Order Statute. Non-violent contact orders also do not prevent the respondent from owning firearms, which a statutory protective order would.

Lake and Marion counties are among the few Indiana counties that administer non-violent contact orders, according to a recent informal study done by the ICADV.

"We hope courts stop ordering them before they get even more popular," Blomquist said.

The Indiana Lawyer is reporting on non-violent contact orders for the Aug. 6-19, 2008, edition.

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Freedom From Religion Foundation: If you really want to be free from religion, don't go to the Christmas Play or the Christmas Pageant or the Christmas Parade. Anything with "Christ" or Saint...fill in the blank...would be off limits to you. Then leave the rest of us ALONE!

  2. So the prosecutor made an error and the defendants get a full remedy. Just one short paragraph to undo the harm of the erroneous prosecution. Wow. Just wow.

  3. Wake up!!!! Lawyers are useless!! it makes no difference in any way to speak about what is important!! Just dont tell your plans to the "SELFRIGHTEOUS ARROGANT JERKS!! WHO THINK THEY ARE BETTER THAN ANOTHER MAN/WOMAN!!!!!!

  4. Looks like you dont understand Democracy, Civilized Society does not cut a thiefs hands off, becouse now he cant steal or write or feed himself or learn !!! You deserve to be over punished, Many men are mistreated hurt in many ways before a breaking point happens! grow up !!!

  5. It was all that kept us from tyranny. So sad that so few among the elite cared enough to guard the sacred trust. Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make the law. Sophocles No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor. Theodore Roosevelt That was the ideal ... here is the Hoosier reality: The King can do no wrong. Legal maxim From the Latin 'Rex non potest peccare'. When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal. Richard Nixon