Expungement Process for Falsely Accused Individuals with Domestic Violence Restraining Orders

Liberty Justice
,
1

Background and Rationale

False accusations of domestic violence can severely impact individuals, affecting employment, housing, and personal relationships. Although domestic violence restraining orders are a vital protective tool, there are cases where individuals are wrongly accused, leading to restraining orders on their records despite being innocent. Currently, there are limited mechanisms for these individuals to clear their records, even after a court finds insufficient evidence or the accusation is proven false. This policy proposal aims to create a pathway for expungement, addressing the need for justice, clarity, and rehabilitation for individuals affected by false accusations.

Policy Objectives

1.	Protect Rights and Reputations: Provide a fair process for individuals who have been falsely accused to clear their records, ensuring they are not penalized for actions they did not commit.
2.	Promote Fairness in the Legal System: Balance the needs of true victims with protections for individuals wrongly accused, maintaining integrity within the restraining order process.
3.	Reduce Social and Economic Barriers: Mitigate barriers to employment, housing, and community participation for individuals who have been falsely accused.

Proposed Policy Provisions

1.	Eligibility for Expungement Process:
•	Individuals with domestic violence restraining orders on their record who can demonstrate that the accusations were proven false in court or were dismissed due to lack of evidence.
•	Individuals who have not been convicted of any related domestic violence offenses within the past 5 years.
2.	Standardized Expungement Application:
•	Create a streamlined application process for expungement to be accessible at the state level, allowing applicants to submit evidence and court rulings indicating the false nature of the accusation.
•	Application review timelines must be set to ensure due process, with completion within six months of filing.
3.	Evidentiary Requirements:
•	Acceptance of court documents, affidavits, and any dismissal records.
•	If necessary, an optional hearing can be requested to present additional evidence or personal testimony.
4.	Repercussions for False Reporting:
•	Strengthen penalties for individuals who knowingly make false domestic violence accusations, which can include financial penalties or community service.
•	Educational programs for potential complainants regarding the legal and ethical implications of making accusations.
5.	Sealed and Confidential Records:
•	Once an expungement is granted, records of the false accusation and DVRO should be sealed and only accessible by court order.
•	Allow expunged individuals to legally deny the presence of a restraining order or related accusation in employment, housing, and other applications.

Implementation and Oversight

1.	Training for Judicial and Law Enforcement Officials:
•	Ensure judges, court clerks, and law enforcement are aware of the expungement policy and trained in handling false accusation cases fairly.
2.	Review Board for Oversight:
•	Establish a state review board to oversee expungement applications, ensure the process is applied fairly, and prevent potential abuses.

Expected Outcomes

•	Improved Reputation and Rights Protection: Individuals cleared of false accusations can restore their reputations, enhancing their ability to participate in society fully.
•	Fairness and Integrity in DVRO Process: A clearer separation between protective orders for legitimate victims and cases involving false accusations, preserving the DVRO system’s credibility.
•	Economic and Social Reintegration: By removing the stigmatizing impact of false accusations, individuals will face fewer barriers to employment, housing, and other aspects of life.
3

I disagree with expunging a “Accused” record if the “Accused” has been charged with several like charges in a 20 year time frame but no verdict. No record should be expunged if the 20 years show continued arrest, questioning, involvement and suspicion with law enforcement.

If the “Accused “ has multiple arrest it shows a continued pattern of questionable behavior and a possible improvement of committing the crime with detection.
If the “Accused” remains out of touch with law enforcement and legal problems specifically centered around domestic violence then the court can decided at that time.

4

Thanks for sharing your perspective, but I have to disagree with a few points you’ve made. Here’s why:

  1. Accusations Are Not Proof of Guilt:

In our justice system, people are considered innocent until proven guilty. Just because someone has been accused or arrested multiple times doesn’t mean they’re guilty of a crime. Without a conviction, it’s not fair to assume a “pattern” of wrongdoing based on suspicion or allegations alone.

  1. Arrests and Investigations Don’t Equal Criminal Behavior:

Arrests or questioning by law enforcement are procedural—they don’t confirm guilt. Many times, charges are dropped, or cases are dismissed because there’s no evidence. Holding those interactions against someone creates stigma and punishes them for things they didn’t do.

  1. False Accusations and Biases Exist:

There are many reasons why someone might face repeated accusations, especially in domestic violence cases. False reports, personal vendettas, or systemic biases can lead to repeated interactions with law enforcement. Using unproven accusations as a reason to deny expungement unfairly punishes people who might already be victims of these dynamics.

  1. Rehabilitation and Justice Matter:

The goal of this policy isn’t to give everyone a free pass—it’s about providing fairness to those who’ve been falsely accused or whose cases were dismissed. If someone hasn’t been convicted of any crimes and has avoided trouble, they deserve a chance to move on without being forever defined by unproven allegations.

  1. Presumption of Guilt Is Dangerous:

Deciding someone is guilty based on repeated accusations instead of actual convictions is a slippery slope. It goes against the basic principle of fairness and opens the door to punishing people based on appearances or assumptions rather than evidence.

I think it’s important to give people a path to clear their names when there’s no legal basis for the accusations against them. This policy is about protecting people who’ve been harmed by false accusations—not excusing bad behavior. If someone hasn’t been convicted and shows they’ve stayed clear of any criminal issues, they should absolutely have the opportunity to clean their record. Everyone deserves a fair shot at rebuilding their lives.

5

Please vote for it! False Allegations/False Accusations/Wrongful Convictions/False Witnesses

6

Tammi and Iam,

As we know and see, Justice Reform is long, hard, and difficult. The biggest challenge is separating the just from the unjust. I laud your efforts and we need to continue to keep up the fight. But in the meanwhile, millions of Americans suffer in poverty as accusation or conviction ruin them for the rest of their lives. And there are no rehibition programs to help. That is why I have proposal the Workers’ Indemnity and Guaranty Plan Justice Reform: Prevent 2nd Class U.S. Citizens - WORKERS’ INDEMNITY AND GUARANTY PLAN that will give back their rights to employment opportunities. It is difficult for people to fight back when they are poor, broke, and have no money. Please support my Policy Idea and give me any feedback, comments, or questions you may have.

1 Like