There are plenty of government website resources available online regarding the paperwork, but going directly to the court is a pretty simple way of getting it done.

In my experience, the court doesn't mess around when it comes to restraining orders because it represents a victim's attempt to avoid escalating harassment and/or violence and they seem to be pretty proactive in wanting to help eliminate harassment and violence before things get out of hand.

When you tell someone that you want no further contact, I believe that the law is on your side in enforcing the fact that you have a right to enjoy no further contact. I don't think that there is a law that provides others with right to have access to you just because they feel compelled by their religion to contact you.

I do not work in the legal field. Anyone here who does, please, by all means, give us some encouragement and enlightenment on the topic of the relevance of restraining orders to Ex-mos in dealing with LDS church representatives who insist on making contacts in spite of the "no further contact" requests made on the part of the Ex-mo.

I am particularly interested in knowing whether or not it could be expected that a court would approve of issuing a restraining against the individuals who made the actual contact as well as the leader(s) under whose direction they are working under and who are custodians of the lists of names of people that they send their agents out to contact.

Positions in ChurchCo are like Musical Chairs.

On the Slight Chance (almost non-existant) that anyone could get an RO against 'a church position', ChurchCo would most likely appeal/fight it as being a violation of their 'Religious Freedoms'; I DOUBT it has ever happened, at least here in the U.S.

a RO against 1 Bp, home or visiting teachers, or a pair of missionaries won't LEGALLY affect future incumbents, although it may 'Slow them down'.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2012 02:40PM by guynoirprivateeye.

NOT if a property owner/renter has banned them.

This has been fought by JWs and they they now honor no contact lists and have paid damages when they've made mistakes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2012 03:33PM by Cheryl.

I believe those are ALL internal to the JWs.

it's a Credit to them if they honor them, however.

JWs have been taken to court for harassment and laws have been passed preventing them from harassing people who tell them to stay away.

So the JWs have started keeping lists of people they do not visit.

I don't understand why it's important that these lists are "internal."

If someone tells them to stay away and they don't, that person can take action. It has nothing to do with lists, internal, external, whatever.

Restraining orders can name a whole organization and are not necessarily only used to restrain individuals.

Where I live the forms have a line for the name of whoever is to stay away from a victim or property. The woman at the desk said to write the name of the church there even though the form doesn't seem to include that option.

However, she said going to court costs money and most people hire a lawyer to represent them. This is expensive.

Instead of doing that, DH and I went to the local police station and filed a complaint. After hearing about what we had suffered and seeing that my husband might get into an altercation with mormon trespassers, the police chief wrote a letter to the bish, the SP, and the MP. He also called each of them and explained the letters and warned them to keep all official mormon representatives off our property and to cut off every kind of contact.

The chief also sent an officer in a black and white car to the bishop's house to explains the terms of his restraining order, meaning stay away or be arrested.

We happened to be going to a mortuary viewing the night the officer talked to the bish. We figured out that's why the bish was late and had to apologize to the widow. I didn't know the guy but got to smirk at him in passing after I offered condolances to my widowed neighbor.

issuing restraining orders on each new violator is important. It goes on their public record and if they decide to ignore it and harass you with a bold testimony in spite of the court order, they are in jail and that goes on their record too.

The evidence of harassment, in the form of restraining orders issued and violations thereof prosecuted, needs to be put on record.

Eventually a lot of affected TBMs will start to realize... "What the hell!? This stupid church assignment landed me a court order against myself? I don't even have that calling anymore but the restraining order is still in force and on my record and that employer did a background check on me and asked me about it! How embarrasing. I'm done with this be preachy bullcrap!" Especially if they pull a "rebellion against the court for the Lord" stunt and end up in the county jail!

Rotating callings is no reason to discourage you from putting restraining orders on every church rep who harasses you with a visit, along with the priesthood leader that the report to.

Can you imagine what the numbers would be like if all of us "live-and-let-live" type Ex-mos actually acted on this and did the restraining order thing on each unwanted Morg visitor? I'd love to see a news story revealing that the local county court's restraining order processing unit was getting clogged up with paperwork due to LDS harasment of members who have resigned and requested no further contact! But it won't happen unless Ex-mos decide to restrain these harassers!

Like I said before, I have already decided on it and so when the day comes that some TBM decides to invade my peace and privacy, I won't be mad, I'll just be looking at him/her thinking "you're done" and get their name and address and their leader's name and address.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2012 05:34PM by drjekyll.

suppose you're a (new) mish from Po-Dunk, you're homesick, family is sacrificing to send you;

You're out 'doing your duty' and some person at some door asks you for your address:

a) do you want Joe Blow showing up at your apartment? NO!

a substitute MIGHT be to give mission info, but chances are, that's in a different county!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2012 06:21PM by guynoirprivateeye.

You make it sound like a restraining order is automatic on application & results in immediate arrest if violated.
Not so in Utah.

Even if you have the full name of the person, you may or may not be granted one without a good reason, and that doesn't include one single visit by that person.
A general restraining order against an organization may be a different case.
In either case, not a police matter.

Even if you're successful in obtaining the order, the order itself is not enough to cause an immediate arrest of the individual.
The process there (totally different from a spouse abuse protective order) is that if the person violates the RO, you get back with the issuing judge who sends out an order to show cause to the violater. Eventually the judge conducts a hearing to determine if there was an actual violation, and goes from there.

It's actually more of a civil matter than a criminal matter.
I used to run into irate complainants quite frequently who'd call police because their attorney had suggested they get an RO, and they did, figuring it was guaranteed holy water.
They were not happy at all when we advised them the RO they triumphantly showed us was essentially toilet paper as far as we were concerned & un-enforceable by police at that point.

Again- this is separate from a protective order in a domestic abuse situation, which IS enforceable by police.
You MAY have other recourses that the PD CAN get involved with, if it becomes a trespass matter or threats are involved.

May be different in other states, but that's the way it works in Utah.

and force them to honor no contact demands.

Mormons don't like police and court involvement and will almost always back down to avoid those things.

If more people took these actions, mormons wouldn't feel as arrogant about trespassing and harassing nonbelievers.

I bet not one bishop in a hundred would attempt to visit someone who had filed a police or court order against him because he'd know the person wouldn't put up with it and he'd be humiliated.

Cheryl,
I was just pointing out that it varies from state to state. Not trying to say it shouldn't be done.

In your case, wherever you are, your PD got directly involved.
Here in Utah there is no police involvement whatever on a civil restraining order.
No chief will write letters or make phonecalls, and certainly no officers will be dispatched to talk to individuals.

Here, I doubt an RO would be issued against Missionary Elder Smith in general.
Trying for a succession of ROs against individual elders would eventually just piss the judge off.

You MIGHT get an RO against your local bishop, but he's not the one that keeps trespassing.
In his own defense, he can claim no knowledge or control of missionary activities & the order would not be considered violated by him.

Yeah, there's a certain amount of truth in your statement that the corporation dislikes courts & adverse publicity.
I'm just saying the idea of trotting over to the local restraining order store & then later waving a piece of paper around won't make the news, won't get a police response in itself, and won't guarantee any arrest. Or even any subsequent prosecution.

The police won't be involved at all.
The RO process is lengthy. Order applied for, if it's granted (no guarantee) the restrained party MUST know about it before he or she can be considered to be violating it (usually must be served, which the PO won't do), if violated the applicant advises the issuing judge who send the violator a notice to appear & show just cause why he or she did not violate it, and if found in violation the judge treats it as a contempt of court, not a criminal matter.

This can all take months.

Tristan,
It can be tricky in applying an RO to an organization, and very hard to decide for the judge in whether a violation has occurred or not.
As I said- for a person to be found in violation of the RO (essentially just a court order), said person must be shown to have known about the order and deliberately acted in violation.

the bar is very low for having a restraining order issued, and the recently described 5:45 AM harassment of a resigned couple by missionaries to request that they clean the church bathrooms before the upcoming 9:00 AM services certainly would meet the bar.

The restraining order does not lead to an arrest. A violation of it does!

You don't go back to the judge, because the order has already been issued, you call the police to enforce it and they haul the person in to jail for violating the order and to wait for an appearance before a judge to see how long their detention sentence will be for having violated the order (usually the process is slow enough, a couple of days, that the judge lets them out on time served, unless they repeatedly violate the order). You don't have to show up at that or any subsequent hearings, because now they are dealing directly with the judge who is going to ask them why the violated HIS order not YOURS.

I have seen it happen firsthand in California and that is how it works, which is why I encourage anyone who gets a visit after having requested no contact to file a restraining order against that individual. If they subsequently violate the order, they go to jail to think about what it means to restrain themselves from pestering you while they are literal restrained in a cell. Simple as that.

As far as Utah goes, Horsefeathers, I really hope that you have your facts straight, because repeatedly going to the issuing judge to fight over whether violations have occurred sounds asenine.

In California, contact is a violation and you call in law enforcement at that time, make a statement to them. If they believe your statement that contact was made, they take the violator into custody and hold them while an appearance before a judge is arranged (unless the violator bails out quickly, which costs them money, but keeps them from waiting in jail for the hearing). Then the violator answers to the judge as to the circumstances of the violation. Your statement to the police is your "appearance" in court.

I've gone to court to get a restraining order and protective order.

Aside of the legal facts -- Many ppl in Utah don't respect the boundaries of others.

with a red circle around a mormon and a line through it?

I know this is a stupid question, but when you have such a broad based restraining order, how are certain people out of the loop supposed to know about it? What if your one of your kid's new teachers is a member, or the cashier at the supermarket, or your postal carrier? I mean is it a restraining order to keep all members away? Or just leaders from harrassing you?

Strangers at the door representing a church's interests are trespassers and harassers if the leaders of the organization have been told to keep them away.

If a homeowner knows the mormon and invites them over, of course those mormons are not trespassing or harassing when they knock on the door.

Examples of mail carriers, policemen, meter readers and such. Their religions have nothing to do with this issue unless they're handing out BofMs when they deliver US mail. Doing that ought to get anyone fired.

I'd say the simplest answer to your question is that, ultimately, the police would decide whether or not violations have occurred or not given the facts from your statement.

And yes, a restraining order against an entire organization would lead to some ambiguities that might result in certain contacts not being deemed prosecutable violations.

If I had an restraining order issued against the local stake in general and some random member showed up at my house, I'd do the fact finding right then and there asking:

Are you here on stake/church business?
Can I get your name and address or number for future reference?
Did you know that a restraining order has been issued against the stake, which includes you, and that means no contact?
Did you know that you are violating the restraining order with this visit that you are making?

Their answers would let you know if they are in the loop or out of the loop. Either way, it is a violation and I am confident that even if they are one of the "totally out of the loop" cases, law enforcement would pay them a visit to let them know that they are just getting a warning, but that it is no laughing matter and the restraining order is to be obeyed in the future.

In the case of a teacher, cashier, or postal carrier, unless they are going out of their way to visit you at your house or harass you in public, they are simply going about their daily lives and there is no violation in that. Likewise, just because you and a person who you have a restraining order against show up at the same restaurant at the same time, doesn't constitute a violation on their part either. A restraining order doesn't mean that they are no longer allowed anywhere where you are present, it simply means they are not to contact or harass you in any way. In public, you go about your business, they go about theirs and leave you alone.

Personally, I am not saying anything pro or con about restraining orders against an entire organization here, I'd talk to Cheryl about those, because it does seem like a bit more complex of a situation.

What I am saying is that anyone who has resigned and in their resignation letter or discussions with LDS officials requested no further contact (which I did), should consider that the very first contact by anyone on church business is a violation of that request and an immediate restraining order against that individual is appropriate, even if you have never met this person before and they were just fulfilling a church assignment delegated to them. I would not simply give them a warning, telling them not to come back, because you open the door to having their leaders simply rotate the visitors, where they assign a new one each time the former one is told not to return. Which is why I would always try to find out the name of the leaders who gave them the assignment as well. If I were to see that leader X kept sending out different visitors to get around the restraining orders that his agents kept getting, then he'd be the next person to have a restraining order issued against him.

That's how these people need to be dealt with because visits are a part of the power trip they are on. They know that visits send the message that "we know who and where you are and we are checking on you for your own good, child"! I have seen enough bishops/bishopric members, elder quorum presidents, stake presidency members, and a mission president chuckle at the attempts of individuals to request no contact and laugh it off as he/she's "moody", "cantankerous", "just bitter", "gonna get over it" and say, "just keep visiting them carefully and they'll come around" to know that they have no respect for boundaries be cause your enforcement of boundaries threatens their sense of "power and spiritual authority concerning all matters"!

These kinds of power-mongering harassers need restraining issued against them right along with their minions.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2012 03:48AM by drjekyll.

That's right. The mormon stalking attitude is intrusive and highly offensive. In the privacy of my own home, I won't stand for it.

Actions always speak louder than words. That's why it works to file police reports and ROs, hose them, flip them off, chase them to their cars, hand them a toilet plunger, or refuse to reach over and take their plates of sugar cookies but let them fall on the ground and kick them away.

Jekyll,
I explained how it is in Utah.

Let me clarify, since you mis-construed what I wrote.
VIOLATION of a civil restraining order does not guarantee an arrest.

Such a restraining order here is simply not a matter of criminal law, it's a matter of civil law.

I do know what I'm talking about, I'm a retired career cop here & I've NEVER arrested anybody on a CIVIL restraining order.
The only arrest arising out of one would be if the issuing judge determined a violation had occurred & therefor issued another order for the violator's arrest, but NOT on the restraining order, it'd be a contempt of court arrest.

Asinine or not, that's how it works.
As I said, numerous people were not happy to hear that the piece of paper they'd obtained to keep somebody away was NO POLICE MATTER & WE WOULD NOT ENFORCE IT.

Cheryl,
There are other statutes & ordinances that may apply, such as trespass, disorderly conduct, and even stalking.
Individual municipalities may enact their own local ordinances involving a non-domestic-abuse protective order, but there is no statewide restraining order statute that I'm aware of.

I am an attorney in Utah and I have had restraining orders issued many times but only in three kinds of cases are they issued: domestic abuse, family law cases like divorce or paternity, or stalking injunctions that require proof of a threat of bodily harm and proof of fear of the threat of bodily harm. In a free country you cannot restrain people from having contact without showing an actual harm to you. There is also never a right that the victim not appear in court after someone violates the restraining order--the law in every state requires evidence. The accused is not guilty nor do they have to prove to the judge anything. The burden is on the accuser not the person alleged to have violated an order. Police do not enforce restraining orders--only protective orders in domestic violence cases.

In every state including California, restraining orders require numerous elements be shown that include intention to harm to the victim, multiple acts (not one act or one unknown act), and actual emotional fear by the victim. And the alleged victim must prove it in court by providing testimony at a hearing a few days after getting a temporary order that expires in a few days. It's the same in every free state in the union.
See citation to silly link below about California.
http://www.ehow.com/list_6662914_california-requirements-restraining-orders.html

RO = PAPER TIGER

WOOOOO WOOOOO WOOOOO

That's why I said that my information was for California, Horsefeathers, you need to read more carefully next time. You're talking apples and I am talking oranges. Get it?

To other readers interested in this topic: Make sure you know what your protections are and do use restraining orders if they are available to you. Don't be discouraged by the blanket statements being made on this thread.

I have seen people have restraining orders issued against them for the exact kind of harassment that the Morg does (repeated unsolicited visits and visits after no more contact was requested) and I have seen people get detained in county jail while waiting to appear before a judge for having violated the restraining order by showing up at the protected person's residence and entering the property. So, I can assure you that people who violate restraining orders in Sacramento County do get taught a lesson! I love the motto on the court's website and paperwork for restraining orders: "No one deserves to be abused."

If you live in Utah, based on what Horsefeathers says, it sounds to me like you are screwed. But from what Cheryl says it sounds like she also lives in Utah and disagrees with the picture painted by the ex-cop. I would check with your county regarding the specifics rather than take anyone's word for it given the confusion we see here.

Cristina only has experience in Utah, so ignore her blanket statement that restraining orders are "popular folklore". Frankly, she doesn't sound like a very good attorney to me. A good attorney would be much more precise in her wording and probably would not use eHow websites as reference material. I doubt that any court in Utah would agree with her statement that restraining orders are popular folklore.

If you live in Sacramento County check with the Superior Court on civil restraining orders. (That is exactly where I have seen them in action).

http://www.saccourt.ca.gov/restraining-orders/civil-harassment.aspx

The point is to force mormons to look at this problem seriously.

I live in California not so far from Sacramento, but I've talked to Utahans who did file police reports. Utah mormons don't like police scrutiny any more than Californans.

Doing nothing is not a good strategy. Taking action often works. If one action isn't 100% effective, add others to the mix. Sitting back and feeling like a prisoner is the worst option in my opinion except for those who like church contact.

I agree with the statement "No one deserves to be abused." And I'd like to point out that abuse is whatever the victim defines it to be.

People in their own homes have a 100% right to determine who may or may not enter their property.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2012 05:59AM by Cheryl.

I have already made the decision that a restraining order will be sought if I tell a visiting individual that they are to "make no further contacts" and then they show up a second time.

Let me clarify, because you are missing the whole point

NOT FILING for a restraining order GUARANTEES that LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL DO NOTHING.

I would think that as and Ex-LEO you would encourage people to go through the proper legal channels in cases where harassment is taking place. And the proper legal channel is to request that a restraining order be issued.

And I agree, violation of a civil restraining order does not GUARANTEE an arrest. (I should have been more precise with my wording, but I wasn't expecting that Ex-LEOs and attorneys would be shitting on this thread saying essentially that it is all a hoax and don't even bother protecting yourself from harassment with a restraining order) The decision to detain the individual is a judgement call for the responding officer to make. He MAY decide to have the individual detained or he MAY warn the individual about the ramifications if future violations occur or he may decide to just bugger off and not do a damn thing (vide infra). I believe that the likelihood increases that the harasser will comply with the order in the future if the officer chooses either of the first two options.

BUT NONE OF THIS HAPPENS IF THERE IS NO RESTRAINING ORDER, AND REQUESTING THAT ONE BE ISSUED IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WANTS PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT.

> As I said, numerous people were not happy to hear
> that the piece of paper they'd obtained to keep
> somebody away was NO POLICE MATTER & WE WOULD NOT
> ENFORCE IT.

Sounds like your police force was not serving and protecting numerous people. I'd say that you guys were ripping off the people paying the taxes to support your police department's wages.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2012 05:32AM by drjekyll.

A book I often quote is "The Gift of Fear." It deals extensively with stalking and mentions one kind of stalker who is most likely to be influenced by police and ROs. That would be a "generally rational stalker who is naive, unsophistacated, or socially thick." Sounds like typical mormon unwanted contact, doesn't it?

This type of stalker needs someone to make perfectly clear that the behavior is inappropriate, counter productive, and will not be tolerated.

Domestic abuse and violant stalkers need other tactics which aren't worth discussing in this context. Police and lawyers who have no experience except these have little or no insight into the harm and implications of naive religious stalking.

I wouldn't want to take this to court because it's expensive and there's no guarantee of winning. Even so, it would send a message and I don't think mormons would continue to bother someone who had tried to get a restraining order on them. If they did, they'd look all the more foolish and fanatical.

Jekyll,
My former PD is the second largest in Utah, in the SLC Valley.
We enforced the LAW, not civil matters.

I don't particularly care what your opinion of this is, I'm just trying to get across the fact that a civil restraining order IS NOT A SIMPLE MATTER NOR IS IT A POLICE MATTER statewide in Utah.

The idea that it's an easily obtained & simple solution to the problem of unwanted visits by church members is not true in this state.
I believe I said something to the effect that other places may differ.

This was not a matter of my old PD not serving its population, it was a matter of NO LAW BEING BROKEN ON A CIVIL RESTRAINING ORDER, which means there was NOTHING we COULD do about such a violation, beyond making a closed case report which would go straight into the record files with no followup or action.

Unless you've been directly involved for many years with criminal & civil law, in THIS state, you're totally uninformed on how things work in that area.
Which further renders your opinion meaningless.

As you've seen, Cheryl does not live in Utah.
I do.
Filing or not filing for a civil restraining order IN UTAH will achieve the same result as far as police are concerned.
A civil restraining order is exactly that- civil.
We CANNOT enforce a law that does not exist, and violation of a civil order is not in itself a law here.

In those cases where the civil order was obtained in ignorance in domestic abuse situations, we did advise the holder of the proper process, which was to obtain a domestic violence ex parte protective order, which does have teeth, and which police can & do enforce. There's a law that allows police to arrest immediately on violation of such, and I did, many times.

In those relatively rare cases where the complainant waived a restraining order at us and it was a matter that did not involve DV, (contrary to the impression some statements made by Cheryl have given, our courts don't hand 'em out like candy), we advised the civil order holder of the proper process, which was to get back with the issuing judge.

Understand that if the situation was violent, there was a risk of harm, or there was some actual law being broken, we took appropriate action.

If it was a case of "My ex-husband came onto my property and violated this CIVIL restraining order, I want him arrested!", if he was gone by the time we got there, no threats or laws broken, and it was not a DV PROTECTIVE order, we could write it up as a trespass (not an RO violation), the report would filter through to a followup detective who could screen with a prosecutor for prosecution IF the ex had been clearly told not to be on the complainant's property, and at some point down the road he might get a summons to appear on a CRIMINAL charge of trespass. Not an RO violation.

If the ex was still there, we could issue a misdemeanor citation for trespass (if he'd been previously told not to come back) and tell him to leave. Or, if he'd not been advised that visits would result in a trespass situation, we could tell him to leave.
If he was calm & left, with or without a ticket, that was it. If he was drunk, beligerent, uncooperative, he could be arrested on that basis.

If the ex had caused damage, there's a law for that.
If he'd been loud & out of control, there's a law for that.
If he'd made threats, there's a law for that.
If he'd assaulted anybody, there's a law for that.
If he was intoxicated, there's a law for that.
If he'd stolen something, there's a law for that.
If he'd merely violated the civil order, there IS NO LAW for that.

All of which left the complainant with a worthless piece of paper & the time spent to get it totally wasted.

As I also said above, there are other statutes & ordinances on the books that may apply to some forms of harassment. Trespass is a statute that can frequently be applied to repetitive visits by the same person once warned to stay off the property, but not generally against an organization. There can be exceptions.

I'm in no way saying that the police will do nothing if a situation is bad enough, or if actual laws are being broken, but the civil order just isn't enforceable by LE.
Whether you like it or not, police enforce LAW in Utah, not wishes.

And Cheryl may be quite right in saying she knows people who have made police reports in Utah. But, that means nothing.
A report can be turned in Active or Closed. If closed, no further action taken.

Even if Open, if a detective puts in a reasonable amount of effort without being able to locate the suspect, or if the city or county prosecutor declines to prosecute, the case is closed out.

There may be smaller municipalities that enact ordinances that go further, but statewide, no.

I'm offering people on this site information on how the law works here in an effort to avoid somebody getting the idea that a civil RO is a viable and easy solution to unwanted church visits.

The best way to avoid or reduce those is to simply be aggressive with these people when they do show up.
Grow a spine, tell them in no uncertain terms to get the hell away from you and/or your proprty, and not to return.

It's a source of perpetual bewilderment to me in reading some of the stories people post here about allowing such visits to continue by being "nice" or by hiding in their own homes when the doorbell rings.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF!
If you can't or won't, then YOU are as much of a problem as the corporation is.
In that case, don't figure on obtaining a little piece of paper to do for you something you're not willing to do for yourself.

If your state has a different RO process, try it if you want, but for the benefit of fellow Utah citizens, don't count on it here.

I hope a few might read this:

ATTENTION, Horsefeathers and others who imagined I said something conflicting with the following!!

The point of filing police reports IS NOT to have police arrest mormons in spite of the one comment I wrote saying my police chief might have one arressted if they continued to harass.

AGAIN!!! The point is NOT to have mormons arrested. NOR is it to have police take care of the probem. Exmos must be in charge. Filing police reports does not automatically mean the police will issue arrests and see that stalkers stay away.

THE POINT IS TO TAKE ACTION!!!!!!!!!!

Stitting back and putting up with abuse doesn't make it go away. Taking action which will intimidate and cow the aggressors is what this is about.

Every citzen has a right to file a report at the local police station and send a copy to the bishop, the SP, the MP and any other mormon who issues harassment orders or brings the cookies or datebread by as manipulation.

Stop and think about each of the people you know who assign people to visit, assign cookie duty, or who show up and do the dirty deeds themselves. I would bet every one of them would be shocked and humiliated to be named in police file that is copied to them in their home especially if it indicated that the report might be made public or if they thought there was a slight chance of a policeman visiting them as happened to the bish where I live.

I think taking this kind of action is a powerful deterent to mormons. I have more spunk than any of them and I wouldn't go to anyone's house if they were so angry as to file a police report on me.

I don't do court orders becaise the police orders are free and solve the problem. But I did pick up the court order papers and would have hired a lawyer if necessary. It just didn't seem worth it to me because it wouldn't be a guaranteed win and because enforcing it might be as hard as enforcing simple "DO not contact orders."

Hosing treapassing mormons also works well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2012 09:14PM by Cheryl.

Cheryl,
You live in a totally different world than I do, on more than one level.

Filing a useless police report is not "taking action", it's pretty much wasting time.
Send a copy to any Mormon who bugs you, if you need a hobby.
I'm not telling you not to.

What I AM doing is disagreeing with the title of this thread as a blanket statement.

Jekyll said he wasn't in the field himself, invited comment from those who are or were, immediately disagreed with responses from a couple of us who are or were, made a derogatory comment about an actual attorney who responded, and appears to want an opportunity to argue with people more than enlightenment.

You seem to be an extreme case, and your much-repeated hose story has gotten you quite a bit of mileage here, but I just don't see the corporation regularly continuing to endlessly harrass an individual who makes it quite clear he or she wants no further involvement as an ongoing thing.
Why bother? What could possibly make you that important to them?

The occasional missionary may show up, ward members may show up.
Make it sufficiently clear to all in forceful language that you're not interested, and that should resolve the visits until or unless a new missionary is assigned to the area.

We've had missionaries here about three times in the past 12 years. Two pairs were random, one gal brought by a neighbor.
Nobody was admitted any of those three times.
I was polite with the neighbor & her "tourist", but not to the others.
We like that neighbor & her husband, and the two gals were just streetwalking, they didn't hit only our house, they went up & down the street.

I find it very hard to believe that the same corporation members would hound anybody endlessly once having been told NO!
They've got to have better things to do.
Subsequent new missionaries may wander by, you know the corporation isn't always particularly well organized.

As for the occasional visit by a new missionary pair, how long does it take to open the door, say "NO!", and close the door?

Anyway, I'm done with this one.
Make your reports, send copies, enjoy your hobby.