NCFM NOTE: This case concerns the overturning of a protection order barring Lori from talking about misinformation, if not bold face lies, told by the alleged victim about a sexual assault by Lori’s son, who is now in prison as the result. Since to our knowledge, few protective order cases are appealed. This is an important public case which might be able to be used in related cases involving false accusations. Click on the title below to read the entire article.
Illinois Appellate Court Overturns a Stop-Posting-About-Plaintiff Order
Trial court: “I understand that you have a first amendment privilege, but sometimes the first amendment privilege contravenes certain statutes that are enacted by the State ….” Appellate court: That’s “a misunderstanding of the relationship between statutes and constitutions.”
From Thursday’s Appellate Court of Illinois decision in Pokorny v. DeBolt, written by Justice Joseph Birkett and joined by Justices Susan Hutchinson and Donald Hudson:
A plenary order of protection barring respondent from disseminating on social media any information identifying petitioner in any way, was improper. The petitioner failed to meet her burden to show that the first amendment did not protect respondent’s communications that were the basis for the order.
Respondent, Lori W. DeBolt, appeals a judgment issuing a plenary order of protection under the Stalking No Contact Order Act … and an injunction in favor of petitioner, Amber Pokorny, and her daughters, A. Z. and A.V….
[P]etitioner listed the following seven writings as justifying the requested order. On June 28, 2020, respondent “post[ed]” that she was praying for “Billy,” who had not seen his daughter for a year. On July 4, 2020, respondent posted on Facebook that petitioner had alienated the father of A.Z. and had abducted A.V. and taken her out of state. She also went into detail about a “claimed Rape.” On July 7, 2020, respondent posted on Facebook that petitioner repeatedly lied to alienate her daughters from their fathers…
