Violent husband ignored restraining orders again and again, punished with a mere fine

Mel Cook’s experience reveals critical gaps in the protection offered by restraining orders, as her ex-husband David Myer repeatedly violated court-imposed restrictions after violently attacking her in 2022. Despite a two-year restraining order following his guilty plea to assault and criminal damage, Myer continued to harass Mel, leading to multiple court appearances and fines, yet the measures failed to prevent further breaches.
Myer’s pattern of behavior included physically assaulting Mel with keys and a belt, smashing a window to reach her, and later breaching the restraining order by recording her in public and searching for her on social media, actions that alarmingly went insufficiently punished. Mel’s victim impact statement, detailing the ongoing trauma and the systemic failures she faced, was not read in court, and the prosecution omitted reference to his prior violent offenses, underscoring a troubling disconnect within the justice system.
Mel expressed her frustration, stating, “My life has changed so much as a victim while his life continues, apart from getting a fine or turning up to probation every now and then. But my life has changed, I’ve changed as a person. The decision to fine him after everything just trivialises domestic abuse. These men get more of a kick out of it than they are bothered about the punishment.” Her case highlights how restraining orders, intended as protective tools, can sometimes empower abusers when enforcement is weak and penalties are minimal.
Court documents show that Myer’s initial sentence was a suspended 17-week prison term alongside a restraining order barring contact and access to Mel’s premises and digital data. However, Mel reported numerous breaches to the police, who arrested Myer each time, yet the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) declined to pursue some cases, citing defenses such as instructions from Myer’s probation officer to record Mel if contact occurred. This rationale raises concerns about the clarity and enforcement of restraining orders and the communication between police and prosecutors.
Despite efforts to clarify the restraining order’s wording to prevent ambiguity, Myer continued to breach it, including contacting Mel by phone less than 24 hours after a court hearing where he was fined. Mel said, “From the first breach I reported, and when the CPS said there was not going to be a case, from that moment I lost all faith in my restraining order. You have these hopes of being protected.” Her experience reflects broader issues in the legal framework for domestic abuse protection, where victims often feel let down by the system’s inability to provide effective and consistent safeguards.
Research into domestic violence orders (DVOs) internationally reveals similar challenges. In some jurisdictions, restraining orders can be issued with minimal evidence, sometimes used strategically in family law disputes, which complicates enforcement and may undermine the presumption of innocence. Experts warn that such orders can have profound consequences, including exclusion from the family home and restricted contact with children, yet enforcement inconsistencies can leave genuine victims vulnerable while emboldening perpetrators.
The UK government has acknowledged the need for stronger protections, introducing Domestic Abuse Protection Orders that allow for longer-term safeguards and electronic monitoring of offenders. A spokesperson emphasized the commitment to “deliver a system that protects victims, supports their journey to justice and holds perpetrators to account,” urging police to use all available tools to enforce orders effectively.
Mel’s case also illustrates the importance of victim impact statements in court proceedings, which provide crucial context about the ongoing effects of abuse. However, the failure to present her statement in court deepened her sense of dismissal. She remarked, “As a victim you get a restraining order and you think you’re going to be protected. Then every time he breaches it, he is just given a fine – which probably doesn’t mean anything to him because he doesn’t work… When he gets a fine, it empowers him to continue.”
Despite these setbacks, Mel encourages other victims not to lose hope and to report all incidents, no matter how minor they seem. She noted that reporting has led to increased security measures for her, including a police marker ensuring immediate response if she calls emergency services. Support services such as Lifecentre, NAPAC, One in Four, Safeline, The Survivors Trust, and Rape Crisis England & Wales offer crucial assistance to survivors of abuse.
South Wales Police highlighted their role in enforcing restraining orders and arresting offenders upon breach, while acknowledging the disproportionate impact of violence on women and girls. Their “See Me” campaign aims to raise awareness and hold perpetrators accountable to foster safer communities.
The challenges faced by Mel Cook underscore the complexity of protecting domestic abuse victims through legal means. They reveal the urgent need for clearer communication between courts, police, and prosecutors, more robust enforcement of restraining orders, and recognition of the lived realities of survivors to ensure justice and safety are truly achieved.