法官对李向东发出的隔离令意味着什么?

芸芸众生

你说这两口子打架，告什么官呢？

那时我父母就嘱咐，想好了再嫁，夫妻打架自己解决，别往娘家跑。

ffgg123

如果说平权会以一份隔离令，拍了一部电影，那么电台以什么理由广播的呢，在2次广播中李大爆他们夫妻之间的战争，很多次都提到女儿长期被母亲虐待，我想问电台凭什么相信李的眼泪？电影是帮助被虐待的妇女不要害怕，用法律保护自己，是正面的，有意义，可是电台的广播本意是想帮助李，如果他真的有委屈，可是因为是直播，所以在不受控制的情况下，李说了很多不应该的话。

加国老三

最初由[加国老三]发布
回复：：回复：忍不住还要说两句




    请问你是西人？笑到最后才是笑！否则........

    “ 来加之前,去过非洲. 51容许我写非洲中文吗?”
难怪你说了那么多中国人的坏话，因为你是“非洲人”！
         继续笑下去！

加国老三

最初由[ffgg123]发布
如果说平权会以一份隔离令，拍了一部电影，那么电台以什么理由广播的呢，在2次广播中李大爆他们夫妻之间的战争，很多次都提到女儿长期被母亲虐待，我想问电台凭什么相信李的眼泪？电影是帮助被虐待的妇女不要害怕，用法律保护自己，是正面的，有意义，可是电台的广播本意是想帮助李，如果他真的有委屈，可是因为是直播，所以在不受控制的情况下，李说了很多不应该的话。

加国老三

最初由[加国老三]发布
广播我听了，其他人也听了，你说那一句是不应该说的话？



让我说，平权会拍教育片本意没错，但是在不了解，不调查的情况下，“以真实的事实，亲身经历，受害者亲自讲述并把当时受虐的情景重演” 这就大错特错了。

ffgg123

你认为的事实是什么，女人打男人？对打？打小孩？是暴力家庭吗，如果是这样那么就是因为不可以再见面女人通过电影，男人通过电台还在打架

加国老三

[第 106 帖][发布时间：2007年06月05日 10:22][在线状态：在线][ID：763084]  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

广播我听了，其他人也听了，你说那一句是不应该说的话？
引用原文：
最初由[ffgg123]发布
如果说平权会以一份隔离令，拍了一部电影，那么电台以什么理由广播的呢，在2次广播中李大爆他们夫妻之间的战争，很多次都提到女儿长期被母亲虐待，我想问电台凭什么相信李的眼泪？电影是帮助被虐待的妇女不要害怕，用法律保护自己，是正面的，有意义，可是电台的广播本意是想帮助李，如果他真的有委屈，可是因为是直播，所以在不受控制的情况下，李说了很多不应该的话。  


让我说，平权会拍教育片本意没错，但是在不了解，不调查的情况下，“以真实的事实，亲身经历，受害者亲自讲述并把当时受虐的情景重演” 这就大错特错了。


你认为的事实是什么，女人打男人？对打？打小孩？是暴力家庭吗，如果是这样那么就是因为不可以再见面女人通过电影，男人通过电台还在打架


   说答非所问！

canadafreeword

别尽整些没有用的!!!

台北夢

最初由[加国老三]发布
回复：回复：：回复：忍不住还要说两句



    “ 来加之前,去过非洲. 51容许我写非洲中文吗?”
难怪你说了那么多中国人的坏话，因为你是“非洲人”！
         继续笑下去！


我身在加国，可以作一个加藉非洲中国人说话吗？！

你在５１论坛没有吵骂其他中国人？你是中国人?大陆的？你骂其他的大陆中国人起不是非常之不爱国?   :rolleyes:

Sedona

I don't know if a court order is sufficient to conclude if Mr. Lee is an abuser in a video.

A court order after the disposition is sufficient, for example:

1. to exclude Mr. Lee from home because he is an abuser.

2. to allow Ms. Wu to apply and to obtain full custody of her daughter because he is an abuser.

3. to allow CAS, if CAS is involved because of child abuse, to register the subject of the court order to the Child Abuse Registry, because he is an abuser.

4. to allow CAS, if they are involved because of child abuse, to verify the abuse by the subject of the court order, thus forming part of the child abuse record, because he is an abuser.

5. to allow Toronto Housing, or York Housing or Peel Housing, if they are involved, to delete him from the list and to allow her full access and rights to the unit, because he is an abuser.

6. to allow Citizenship and Immigration Canada to waive the conditions in a sponsorship agreement if the victim is a subject of an immigration sponsorship, because he is an abuser.

A court order is no monkey's business; it is the foundation of social stability.

daydreaming

最初由[Sedona]发布
He is an abuser

I don't know if a court order is sufficient to conclude if Mr. Lee is an abuser in a video.

A court order is no monkey's business; it is the foundation of social stability.

Probably some of us don't believe the Justice System and wanted Mr. Lee to challenge it;  But before the Court make any changes for him, he is an abuser, though some believe in his tears and story sharing.

It doesn't make sense to argue if Mr. Lee is justified to get a restraining order or not, if he thinks he is wronged, please go to appeal.

Currently, we are discussing the Domestic Violence incident based on the fact that he got a restraining order or no contact order, I don't know exactly which.

It doesn't make sense that we simply believe in his story, his tears. What we are able to believe is the Justice System, we have to follow the court order which protects the victim and constrain the suspect.

However, no one talking over the forum or Ping Quan Hui or Chinese Family Service is entitled to investigating, verifying who is right or wrong iexcept the Justice System. That's why some of us on this forum shared their opinions based the order rahter than guess or anticipations after listening to the story.

It is easier to tell which assumption is more logical.

Still, Mr. Lee keeps on disclosing their family secrets regarding AMANDA WU, which violates Amanda's privacy and also his daughter's privacy. If she likes, she is able to sue him.

If he really cares about how his daughter feels, he should have already stopped nagging the details how his daughter was conceived.

I am not sure if Mr. Lee is clear about what he wants now from the public or the Justice System? Or simply to revenge?

Ding2u

木然先生一再强调 "本着实事求是出发，不要为了证明自己的观点，而创造论据，误导读者", 不知道木然先生能否将和平权会与李先生当天访问的内容公布于众,让读者们自己判断是非黑白,而不是你木然"电台"独家"放送? 这样是不是也省了木然先生的笔墨? 相信大多数读者都具有一定的判断力,而不是将事态推至"公说公有理,婆说婆有理"的混战之中. 关于一直都没有平权会与李先生当天访问的录音发表出来,笔者质疑到底木然先生在极力表达些什么?是点击率在作怪吗? 木然先生讲的实事求是到底是求谁的是???

木然先生强调"因为隔离令规定，李先生与李太太，就算是电话对话也不允许。所以，我没有邀请李太太". 请问:作为新闻媒体的专业人士, 没有李太太的声音,为什么木然"电台"还执意要单方面"宣传"李先生的苦衷呢?这样是不是有失专业水准?是不是有失公正?联系不到不是理由,那只是你的工作还没有做到家. 反过来看,平权会的宣传家庭暴力的教育片是基于有"法院隔离令"的情况下拍摄的,  有"法院隔离令" 相信家庭暴力已经发生, 请问L木然"电台"的"李先生的苦衷系列1,2,3"是在什么样的事实下完成的呢?

关于木然先生采访的华人家庭辅导中心总干事区慕启先生的分析解答, 有待于进一步考证, 试想作为出品人之一的区先生,为什么要自己打自己嘴巴呢? 是区先生有失专业水准还是...??? 区先生能出来说句话吗?

Sedona

木然, you are wrong.

1.先给你再强调一下，我要说的是什么问题。我所提出的问题，是平权会拍摄这样一个影片，拿的是政府的资助，却以一个“隔离令”，以及一个“找不到李先生”的借口，凭借想象，演绎一个真人故事，这种缺乏公道、公平和专业的工作态度，怎么能服务社区，所拍摄的影片，是否具备意义？

平权会 does not rely on imagination.  They are based on information available including the court order, disclosure from Ms. Wu and possibly records from social service agencies, with consent.  They are not based on 凭借想象, which is a strong accusation.  You have to provide evidence to prove 平权会 did the video based on imagination.

Too bad you deny the importance of a court order. The judge won't issue a court order by 凭借想象.

2.   .......如果你中文阅读能力不好，听力应该没有问题吧？我不相信你不明白我所一而再，再而三的强调。

I am shocked by your statement.  All professionals must have a stable EQ.

4.你发表你的观点时，不应该想当然地给对方下个定义，你怎么知道我没有看过相关资料呢？

Please tell us what you have read.  Police disclosure?  Agency record?  CAS file? The court order?  Or, information from Mr. Lee?

Did you read Mr. Lee's telling the world he made his ex-wife pregnant on the first date?  Did you read how he interacted with his family? (Based on his own submission, I don't believe Mr. Lee is a victim.  I have said it Mr. Lee fits the profile of a male abuser.)

我在节目中邀请了《破碎家庭》出品人之一，华人家庭辅导中心总干事区慕启先生分析解答，他的资历是被政府认可的，目前多伦多警察局所经手的华裔家暴案的心理辅导，大都转介到他们中心处理，他在听完我们第一次节目後，即写信给平权会，明确要求平权会停止发行《破碎家庭》，认为该影片已经失去了原有的意义...

In language logic, we call the above appeal to authority.  He might have written a letter.  What is the purpose of the letter?  To pacify the community?  You can't, based on such a letter, to conclude 平权会 was wrong.  Every stakeholder and every citizen can write a letter to any organization.  I can write a letter and you can write a letter.  Unless you successful ask Mr. Au to declare 平权会 made a mistake, don't appeal to authority. Don't put words into his mouth.

同时，他在出席我们节目中，明确说明的家暴案的细节，对于“隔离令”也有专业的解释，所以，弄舟先生，我做的功课，一定不比你少，建议你有心做功课，最好把我们的节目也听一下。

I have also offered my professional input to explain what no contact order is.  My argument is Ms Wu requires protection by a court order.

I heard your program.  Patrick Au did not talk about what a no contact order is.  His response was a typical answer of bureaucracy, e.g. "it depends on the scenario...."

弄舟先生，我做的功课，一定不比你少，建议你有心做功课

You are passive aggressive.  Don't forget you are an "icon".

Sedona

木然, as an icon in the Chinese community and the Chinese media, you have the social responsibility asking right questions and providing information free of personal bias.

In your program with Patrick Au, you spent at least the first 10 to 15 minutes telling the audience that a man will be detained for a long time, because of unfounded allegation by a woman, without any evidence.

What was said in the program was wrong.  I have said it in 51 there are 2 principles in consideration of a detention: flight risk and security.

In Mr. Lee's case, he returned home in 2 weeks, violating the first no contact order.  Though Mr. Lee refused to confirm it, I trust that's the reason for his detention. You have the social responsibility to tell the audience if we have a no contact order and we don't like it, we must return to court to have it amended first. Or else, don't be surprised by jail time.

Correct me please, if you have insider's information.  Otherwise, you have misled the Chinese community.