What kind of evidence do you need for a restraining order hearing?

Criminal Law Topics
1

Hey everyone… So I’m trying to figure out what kind of evidence is needed for a restraining order hearing. Also, how old can the evidence be?

2

Pretty sure it’s gotta be by ‘preponderance’… basically means more likely than not. Like 50% plus a bit. Anyone else know more?

3

Adley said:
Pretty sure it’s gotta be by ‘preponderance’… basically means more likely than not. Like 50% plus a bit. Anyone else know more?

Yeah, that’s right. Preponderance just means tipping the scale slightly in your favour. Doesn’t have to be beyond a reasonable doubt like in criminal cases.

4

Adley said:
Pretty sure it’s gotta be by ‘preponderance’… basically means more likely than not. Like 50% plus a bit. Anyone else know more?

What does preponderance even mean? Lol.

5

@Shay
Oh, it just means that your evidence shows that it’s more likely true than not. Like, even if it’s just a bit more convincing than the other side.

6

@Shay
Yeah, think of it like the scales just barely tipping in your direction. Not super strong proof, just enough to lean your way.

7

I think evidence can be kinda old as long as it’s still relevant… like, no set expiration. But fresher stuff usually looks better.

8

Dru said:
I think evidence can be kinda old as long as it’s still relevant… like, no set expiration. But fresher stuff usually looks better.

Yeah, I’ve seen cases where evidence from years back was still used. Guess it just depends on the situation.

9

Dru said:
I think evidence can be kinda old as long as it’s still relevant… like, no set expiration. But fresher stuff usually looks better.

Makes sense… relevance over age, I guess.

10

If you’re dealing with this, make sure your evidence is solid… like texts, photos, or anything that shows what happened. Better to have too much than too little.

11

Dahlia said:
If you’re dealing with this, make sure your evidence is solid… like texts, photos, or anything that shows what happened. Better to have too much than too little.

That’s helpful, thanks! I’ve got some texts and call logs saved.

12

I’m not a lawyer, but from what I know, it’s better to have consistent evidence… not just one random thing from forever ago.

13

Corin said:
I’m not a lawyer, but from what I know, it’s better to have consistent evidence… not just one random thing from forever ago.

Yeah, like showing a pattern rather than one isolated incident.

14

Corin said:
I’m not a lawyer, but from what I know, it’s better to have consistent evidence… not just one random thing from forever ago.

Exactly Judges tend to take patterns more seriously than one-off stuff.