Halloween Harasser Miscalculates the Expiration Date on a Restraining Order

halloween card

Photo Credit: Campbelj45ca

Siouxsie is no fan of stalkers or harassers.  This is especially so when they use the creepiness of Halloween for all the wrong reasons.   It appears that the Court of Appeals of Arizona agrees.

State of Arizona v. Lychwick involved an ex-employee, Keith Lychwick, who harassed his former manager after being laid-off around Halloween.  Over the course of the next three months, Lychwick made a series of threatening phone calls to his former manager at her home.  The manager sought and obtained a one-year injunction against the harassment.  Lychwick was served with the injunction on January 17, 2006 at 11:00 a.m.  Apparently, Lychwick abided by the terms of the injunction until the following year.   On January 17, 2007 at approximately 10:00 a.m., Lychwick drove past the manager’s house and flung a package at it.   It contained the following:  a sympathy card; a note about losing a loved one; a rock inscribed with R.I.P; a bag from work; and a Halloween card that read “Thinking of you ON HALLOWEEN [“Hooooooo,” with an image of an owl]  When nighttime falls all around you and scary sights are seen, ‘owl’ be missing you . . . [“B00000000,” with image of jack-o-lantern] . . . and wishing you a fun-filled Halloween!”

The manager  believed these to be threats against her life.  Lychwick was indicted for violating the injunction.  At trial, Lychwick tried to argue that the alleged package-flinging incident occurred one day after the expiration of the one-year injunction.  The trial court disagreed and found Lychwick guilty.

A few days ago, the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling.   The State argued that the injunction remained in effect until 11:00 a.m. on January 17, 2007.  The court disagreed and took it one step further.  The court held that the date of service is completely excluded when calculating a one-year time period.  And therefore, the entire day was within the period of the injunction’s validity.  The court upheld the conviction and the sentence.

Siouxsie applauds this holding and says “thank heavens Lychwick did not think to use a date calculator.”

Advertisements

~ by siouxsielaw on October 27, 2009.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: