A Westchester judge is holding up a couple's wedding by refusing to lift an order of protection against the would-be groom for allegedly beating his future wife.
The man, identified only as Paul L. in court papers, allegedly put his fiancée in a headlock and slammed her into a wall in March, leaving her with a bloody nose and facial cuts.
An order of protection was issued based on a deposition from a neighbor.
The bride-to-be did not sign a complaint against her boyfriend and still planned to get married on May 12.
But that's going to be difficult since Tuckahoe Village Justice David Otis Fuller Jr. is refusing to rescind the stay-away order, saying the woman is still in danger.
"The defendant and the victim may be upset if their plans to marry are delayed by the stay-away being in place," Fuller wrote in a decision filed Tuesday.
"But the order of protection is intended to protect the victim from potential harm even if she is not averse to the risk."
Paul L.'s lawyer told the judge the couple had spent a lot of time and money planning the wedding and are expecting guests from out of town - but Fuller refused to budge.
"The defendant and his fiancée, though, were aware of the impediment as the wedding day approached and continued with their plans in spite of it without any indication that the stay-away would be lifted," Fuller wrote.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...l#ixzz0nDZ3jQH6
The man, identified only as Paul L. in court papers, allegedly put his fiancée in a headlock and slammed her into a wall in March, leaving her with a bloody nose and facial cuts.
An order of protection was issued based on a deposition from a neighbor.
The bride-to-be did not sign a complaint against her boyfriend and still planned to get married on May 12.
But that's going to be difficult since Tuckahoe Village Justice David Otis Fuller Jr. is refusing to rescind the stay-away order, saying the woman is still in danger.
"The defendant and the victim may be upset if their plans to marry are delayed by the stay-away being in place," Fuller wrote in a decision filed Tuesday.
"But the order of protection is intended to protect the victim from potential harm even if she is not averse to the risk."
Paul L.'s lawyer told the judge the couple had spent a lot of time and money planning the wedding and are expecting guests from out of town - but Fuller refused to budge.
"The defendant and his fiancée, though, were aware of the impediment as the wedding day approached and continued with their plans in spite of it without any indication that the stay-away would be lifted," Fuller wrote.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...l#ixzz0nDZ3jQH6
Comment