- checking login information
The Women's Rights Cause
395,912 people care about Women's Rights
Loading...Judge Orders Man to Apologize to Estranged Wife on Facebook Following Domestic Abuse Verdict
Over the last few weeks I’ve found myself often writing about domestic violence as evident here, here, here, and here.
Today I came across another story regarding domestic violence with an interesting twist.
In Cincinnati a man named Mark Byron was found guilty of domestic violence against his estranged wife Elizabeth Byron last June. Following the verdict in November, Mark posted the following comment on his Facebook wall about his wife:
“If you are an evil, vindictive woman who wants to ruin your husband’s life and take your son’s father away from him completely – all you need to do it say that you’re scared of your husband or domestic partner and they’ll take him away!”
In response, Elizabeth filed a motion against Mark stating that his comment violated the temporary protection order she was given in June which prohibited Mark “from causing plaintiff or the child of the parties to suffer physical and/or mental abuse, harassment, annoyance or bodily injury.”
In January a judge ruled that Mark had in fact violated the protection order and sentenced him to 60 days in jail and a $500 fine – a sentence that could be avoided if Mark paid back his child support and posted a written apology on his Facebook page for 30 days.
Mark decided to go with the apology. Here are some of the excerpts from the public apology:
“I hereby acknowledge that two judicial officials in the Hamilton County Domestic Relations Court have heard evidence and determined that I committed an act of domestic violence against Elizabeth…”
“…I hereby apologize to Elizabeth for casting her in an unfavorable light by suggesting that she withheld [my son] from me or that she in any manner prevented me from seeing [my son] during that period. That decision was mine and mine alone…”
“…I further apologize to all my Facebook Friends for attempting to mislead them into thinking that Elizabeth was in any manner preventing me from spending time with [my son], which caused several of my Facebook Friends to respond with angry, venomous, and inflammatory comments of their own.”
It’s interesting to see how today’s social media driven world had an impact on this case. It’s clear that Mark’s Facebook comment was a complete lie and that it’s very possible that Elizabeth was scared of her husband as he was found guilty of domestic violence. She was probably also scared for her son but it wasn’t Elizabeth that prevented Mark from seeing his son, but Mark himself.
What is most notable to me about the apology, however, was Mark’s admission that he was convicted of domestic abuse, a fact that many abusers are unwilling to admit. Sure, he was legally obligated to admit doing so publically on Facebook but there it is in black and white – at least for the next 30 days.
What do you think? Was the public apology and child support payments an appropriate sentence in lieu of paying a $500 fee and serving 60 days in jail?
Related from Care2:
Hugh Hefner’s Son Arrested for Domestic Abuse
Love is Respect: February is Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month
New Bill Would Require Police to Witness Violence Firsthand Before Making Arrest
Read more: domestic abuse, domestic violence, facebook, women’s rights
Photo Credit: Money Blog Newz
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
Cont. Then you will understand why we need gay characters. We are supposed to take up 10% of the population,…
another reason while animals should not be taken for granted. these owls are making this country so…
The only war on women is from the Left attacking conservative women. plus the title of this piece should…
meet our writers
99 comments
+ add your ownI tend to take these articles with a pinch of salt. We have no information about the actual domestic violence case; plus, political correctness is often overused in the U.S.
I don't think it was really "justice".. since the child support was something he should have already paid to begin with. Maybe the fine would have set things straight. Also, a forced apology is an insincere apology... fot both the wife and the other facebook users.
Yes, how sincere could the apology be since he was told to do it. You and I both know he probably does NOT mean it.
How could anyone abuse, someone that you love? I will never understand that. They say that they love you then they hit you or treat you bad.... specially children... How could anyone do that to their loved one, that's not love at all if you ask me.
THANK YOU! Domestic Violence needs to STOP! Men have to realize that this action is WRONG! All women---who have had this done to them---need to STAND UP---allow others to see the HARM---that it is doing to ALL WOMEN!
We need to be more considerate of each other in our lives not just facebook but really learn to say something nice or just say nothing at all be kinder than necessary folks
I do love the potential for social media for us to all get real - even if there is a way we can hide behind it, there is also a way in which everybody witnesses what you are going through, and perhaps one speaks more truthfully with keyboard courage - therefore letting us all see deeper into one another. Great article.
Most abusers share the personality trait of being control freaks. The original comment was to take control over his ex wife's emotions, to scare her into the corner.
Thing is, this public humiliation, which he may have originally thought that would help take control over the court process, may have given him insight to what he does to his victim(s). Now it's on facebook stating that he is indeed an abuser, and it's his crime that took his child away.
With facebook, it doesn't matter if you have it semiprivate. If your friend comments on that thread, that person's friends list can see your private amongst friends post, as well as the comment that person made. Facebook is NOT private.
Thanks for the article.
As I was saying... This seems to have moved beyond the realm of causing harm or disruption to the protected party into the realm of policing thought and speech. Protection from harm is reasonable. Protection from disagreement is not--and disagreement is virtually assured in an acrimonious divorce.
I would also like to know the background on the domestic violence issue. One wonders how justifiable the conviction is. Again, there are some pretty strange definitions on both ends of the spectrum.
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment
20