Today, 1 July, is the day that the informal opposition briefs from the appellees are due at the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s. I posted my opposition brief earlier this week, and I’ll be posting the other appellees’ brief over the weekend.
Meanwhile, here’s the latest bit of inept pro se work from TDPK. Although he isn’t a party, he filed a appellee’s brief with the Court of Special Appeals in the Walker v. Maryland Grace’s Law case. Now, he’s filed a supplement to his brief.
This is a prime example of how TDPK get the law wrong. None of the laws that Aaron Walker is challenging are related to domestic abuse. None of them relate to predicate acts that can trigger a Protective Order under Maryland law.
(b)(1) “Abuse” means any of the following acts:
(i) an act that causes serious bodily harm;
(ii) an act that places a person eligible for relief in fear of imminent serious bodily harm;
(iii) assault in any degree;
(iv) rape or sexual offense under §§ 3-303 through 3-308 of the Criminal Law Article or attempted rape or sexual offense in any degree;
(v) false imprisonment; or
(vi) stalking under § 3-802 of the Criminal Law Article.
(2) If the person for whom relief is sought is a child, “abuse” may also include abuse of a child, as defined in Title 5, Subtitle 7 of this article. Nothing in this subtitle shall be construed to prohibit reasonable punishment, including reasonable corporal punishment, in light of the age and condition of the child, from being performed by a parent or stepparent of the child.
(3) If the person for whom relief is sought is a vulnerable adult, “abuse” may also include abuse of a vulnerable adult, as defined in Title 14, Subtitle 1 of this article.
Md. Family Law § 4-501. Two of the laws Aaron is challenging can trigger a Peace Order, but Peace Orders are not used for situations of domestic abuse. That’s what Protective Orders are for.