The fact that UNNAMED DAD has "no prior criminal history" appears to me to be fairly meaningless. I suspect that's only because nobody has called the police on him before. Or because there's no recorded conviction (note that this one will not be recorded).
Who says dads are discriminated against? This obviously violent and volatile father finally managed to seize custody after an 8-year-battle with the mother (that sounds abusive in and of itself). He then proceeds to the home of his ex-mother-in-law where his 6-year-old daughter is staying. (Huh? He's been battling for custody before she was born?) The mother-in-law (grandmother) has the fence around her property locked and the daughter is refusing to go with the father because she is frightened.
No doubt all the PAS sympathizers are saying the poor child is brainwashed.
But note that the subsequent events PROVE that this child has good reason to be terrified, and in fact, has probably witnessed previous incidents involving Daddy's rage.
The grandmother calls the police after Dad becomes threatening. He takes her mobile phone, becomes "agitated," and throws the phone to the ground. When the grandmother attempts to retrieve the phone by going outside the locked fence, Dad puts his car in reverse, knocking the grandmother "onto the bonnet" (trunk for American readers). He then accelerates and manages to pin the grandmother to the fence post.
Speaking of who is lying and all, note that Daddy is claiming some sort of amnesia about the incident (if "amnesia" isn't the last refuge of a scoundrel, I don't know what is).
Observe that there isn't one word here about Dad's custodial status being revoked. So even after this father PLEADS GUILTY TO ASSAULT, he still may have custody. Even though the judge concedes that the incident would have been "very traumatic" for the child. AND that there will be no record of a conviction, so we can pretend this Dad has no track record of violence the next time he pulls a stunt like this. Traumatic to the child?
No sh**, Sherlock.
http://www.qt.com.au/story/2010/03/22/grandma-pinned-to-fence-post/
Grandma pinned to fence post
22nd March 2010
AN IPSWICH man pinned his ex-wife’s mother to a fence post with his ute after being told he could not take his child.
Ipswich District Court heard the 41-year-old man – who had custody of his two children after an eight-year family law courts battle – arrived at his ex-mother-in-law’s home in October, 2008 to pick up his daughter.
But the grandmother – then aged 57 – told the man through a locked fence the six-year-old child did not want to leave.
Crown Prosecutor John Copley said the man, who cannot be named due to family law courts proceedings, demanded his child while sitting in the driver’s seat of his dual cab utility.
Mr Copley said the grandmother called police and handed her mobile over to the man who then became agitated and threw her phone on the ground.
The grandmother crawled through the fence to retrieve her phone but the man reversed and drove at her, knocking the woman onto the bonnet.
As the woman reached for her phone, the man again accelerated – pinning the 57-year-old to the pole.
The man’s daughter, who witnessed the horrifying incident, cried out: “Daddy is trying to kill my grandma, somebody please help her!”
The grandmother received bruising on her legs and arms as a result of the incident.
The man pleaded guilty to assault occasioning bodily harm while armed and was fined $5000 with no conviction recorded.
Defence barrister Bertram Curran said his client’s emotions had been running high on the day after years of disputes with his ex’s mother.
Mr Curran said the man, an electrician, had a fuzzy recollection of events and his actions were out of character as he had no criminal history.
Judge Gregory Koppenol said the events would have been very traumatic for the man’s six-year-old daughter.