Our courts are easily manipulated by women pretending to seek protection from abuse because our political climate reinforces the stereotype that men are abusers. A woman can get a domestic-abuse restraining order for any reason. She fills out the forms and says she is "afraid", and gets a restraining order automatically. There is no penalty for making false claims. Thus, they embolden women angry at their partners to use them to gain an advantage in divorce, to get custody of children without a family court hearing, or as a surefire eviction process. There are no rules of evidence, no burden of proof, not even a requirement to have a story that makes sense. In December 2005, Colleen Nestler came to Santa Fe County District Court in New Mexico and got a domestic-abuse restraining order against TV host David Letterman. She stated, under oath, that Letterman had 'abused' her by causing her 'bankruptcy, mental cruelty, and sleep deprivation'. Nestler also alleged that he sent her "secret signals in code words" through his television program and that he "responded to my thoughts of love" by telepathically expressing his desire to marry her. Sounds crazy? Judge Daniel Sanchez immediately issued a restraining order against Letterman. By doing so, he put Letterman on a national list of domestic abusers, gave him a criminal record, took away several of his constitutionally protected rights, and subjected him to criminal prosecution if he contacted Nestler (directly or indirectly), or possessed a firearm. David Letterman never even met Colleen Nestler, and this all happened without his knowledge. Asked to explain why he had issued a restraining order on the basis of such an unusual complaint, Judge Sanchez answered that Nestler had filled out the restraining-order request form correctly. The really amazing thing is that the judge had no choice. Current federal and state legislation mandates this draconian action whenever any woman alleges domestic abuse - true or not. The judge finally dismissed the order after much expensive legal wrangling. Those who dont have a national TV program and deep pockets are rarely so fortunate. Falsely issued restraining orders are of great concern because the punishment that is meted out to defendants is a violation of their Constitutional protections. Feminist political clout trumps the rights of the accused. Here's what happens: After the initial (secret) restraining order is issued, the clerk faxes it to the police, who then serve it on the defendant. Since most orders contain a "no contact" provision, the first thing the police do is remove the man from his home, with little more than the shirt on his back The man may have no idea that the Pro Se hearing took place, that a restraining order was granted, or what he is supposed to have done. Most restraining orders require that the defendant may not contact the plaintiff directly or indirectly or get within some distance, usually 100 yards, of the alleged victim. Often, wives will list their children as 'co-victims' on these orders, so the defendant cannot contact his children either. No contact means no phone calls, no e-mail, no cards, no letters, or even accidentally running into the person on the street. No reconciliation is possible once an order is issued because any contact is a crime and subjects the violator to immediate arrest and jail. Most district attorneys, intimidated by feminist political pressure, have a no-drop policy on prosecuting all domestic restraining orders, no matter what. This means that even if the woman admits she lied, the order and the charges will stand. The claimant will not be subjected to any form of punishment, or even censure. Only a dysfunctional system allows complainants to make false allegations without any accountability whatsoever.