Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Johnnie Faye Cartwright has pleaded not guilty to six charges—including DUI and reckless endangerment—after a high-risk incident involving her three children and fiancé Zachery Ty Bryan on Nov. 29. A judge has now issued a domestic-violence-related no contact order as Bryan remains jailed for a probation-violating assault charge. The case is escalating quickly with major legal consequences ahead.
Zachery Ty Bryan’s latest mugshot alongside a recent family photo with fiancée Johnnie Faye Cartwright and their child, highlighting the contrast between his public image and ongoing legal troubles.
The spiralling legal troubles surrounding Home Improvement actor Zachery Ty Bryan intensified this week as his fiancée, Johnnie Faye Cartwright, stood before an Oregon judge just 48 hours after their simultaneous arrests.
The 32-year-old mother of three pleaded not guilty on Dec. 1 to a series of misdemeanor charges, including driving under the influence and recklessly endangering another person, following what deputies describe as a dangerous confrontation along Big Fall Creek Road near Lowell on Nov. 29.
Authorities allege Cartwright crashed a pickup truck carrying the couple’s three young children after attempting to strike Bryan, who had stepped out of the vehicle moments earlier. Deputies say both adults showed signs of impairment, raising immediate concerns not only about criminal liability but the ongoing safety of the children caught in the middle of their volatile relationship.
What makes this moment even more consequential is the history behind it: Bryan, 44, was already under a court order prohibiting contact with Cartwright due to a previous domestic violence case. His arrest for fourth-degree assault triggered an instant probation violation, leaving him jailed without bail. The legal stakes now stretch far beyond a single incident—this is a turning point that could reshape custody, sentencing, and the couple's future.
Deputies responded around 12:30 p.m. on Nov. 29 to reports of reckless endangering near a popular campground outside Lowell, Oregon. Investigators learned Bryan had exited the couple’s truck and was walking along the road when Cartwright allegedly attempted to run him over, ultimately crashing into a ditch with their three young children still inside. No injuries were reported.
The sheriff’s office stated that both adults showed signs of impairment, and witnesses were interviewed on scene. Crucially, Bryan was not permitted to be near Cartwright due to an existing no contact order tied to a prior domestic violence case. This turned his arrest into an immediate probation violation.
Cartwright was initially booked on a felony attempted assault charge, later cleared at arraignment, leaving six misdemeanor charges in place. Bryan remains held without bail until at least Dec. 3.
This case blends criminal law, domestic violence protections, probation enforcement, and child endangerment statutes. Cartwright’s charges—DUI, reckless driving, and reckless endangerment—require prosecutors to show that her conduct and impairment posed a real risk to others, especially with children present.
The no contact order issued Monday underscores judicial concern about the volatility between the parties. These orders are a standard protective measure when domestic violence history and potential ongoing risk overlap.
For Bryan, the legal jeopardy is anchored in probation rules. When someone on supervised probation makes prohibited contact or is implicated in new criminal conduct, courts must determine whether they violated conditions knowingly and whether that violation endangers others. Violations can result in immediate custody and re-sentencing based on the original conviction.
Upcoming steps include evidentiary review, pretrial scheduling, and probation violation hearings that will shape the trajectory of both cases.
Bryan could face jail time if the court finds a serious probation violation. Cartwright’s misdemeanor charges can also carry jail sentences, though outcomes often include probation or treatment requirements for first-time offenders.
Cartwright faces six misdemeanor counts: DUI, two counts of reckless endangerment, and three counts of reckless driving. Bryan faces fourth-degree assault tied directly to his probation status.
Deputies reported impairment indicators, a crash scene, and witness accounts. The strength of the case will depend on toxicology results and evidence confirmed during discovery.
Dismissal is unlikely without evidentiary issues or negotiated plea agreements. There is no indication prosecutors intend to drop the charges at this stage.
Misdemeanor DUI and endangerment cases typically unfold over several months. Probation violation proceedings move faster, meaning Bryan may face a judicial decision sooner.
This case illustrates how domestic violence protection orders work—and how seriously courts treat violations. Even consensual or accidental contact can trigger major legal consequences when a protective order is in place. It also shows how DUI and reckless endangerment charges become significantly more severe when children are present, as child safety is a central legal priority.
The incident also highlights how separate legal issues—probation, impairment, family safety—interlock in real time, resulting in swift judicial intervention.
Best-case scenario:
Cartwright completes treatment and probation programs while maintaining custody arrangements supervised by the court. Bryan resolves the violation with limited sanctions and enhanced monitoring.
Worst-case scenario:
Courts impose jail time for Cartwright, while Bryan faces a substantial re-sentencing on his underlying domestic violence conviction, alongside stricter long-term protective measures.
Most common outcome in similar cases:
Structured probation, mandated counselling, continued protective orders, restrictions on contact, and supervised parenting plans to ensure safety and minimise risk.
Are the children safe, and where are they now?
Deputies confirmed the children were placed with a family member immediately after the incident. Long-term arrangements will be addressed later by the court.
Is this related to Bryan’s previous domestic violence cases?
Yes. Bryan’s arrest violated an existing no contact order stemming from an earlier domestic violence case, intensifying his legal exposure.
Did anyone get hurt in the crash?
Deputies reported that no physical injuries occurred, including to the children inside the truck.
Could either of them regain contact soon?
Only if a judge modifies or lifts the protective order. For now, the no contact order remains in effect.
This case has become a high-stakes intersection of DUI law, domestic violence protections, and strict probation enforcement. With Cartwright facing six active charges and a court-ordered separation, and Bryan detained for violating an existing domestic violence probation order, both now sit in legally precarious positions. The next hearings will determine whether either party faces heightened penalties, modified custody arrangements, or extended supervision. The stakes—for their freedom, their children, and their long-term legal futures—remain significant.
👉 Latest: What Is Assault and Verbal Assault in the USA? 👈
Former “Home Improvement” actor Zachery Ty Bryan was jailed in Eugene, Oregon, after violating the terms of his domestic violence probation.
His girlfriend, Johnnie Faye Cartwright, was also arrested on multiple charges. Bryan is being held without bail until Wednesday, escalating an already severe legal trajectory rooted in past domestic violence convictions.
Zachery Ty Bryan, once known to millions as the lovable eldest son on Home Improvement, is now at the center of a spiralling legal emergency that unfolded in Eugene, Oregon, over the weekend.
Police took the 44-year-old actor into custody on Saturday after authorities determined he had violated the strict terms of his domestic violence probation, imposed in 2023 following a conviction that barred him from contacting the victim without explicit court approval.
He was denied bail and will remain in custody until Wednesday, according to court documents.
His girlfriend, Johnnie Faye Cartwright, was arrested during the same incident and now faces five serious charges, including driving under the influence, three counts of reckless endangerment, and attempted first-degree assault.
The pair who share multiple children, were detained after what officials describe as a high-risk situation that triggered immediate legal intervention.
The timing is devastating for Bryan. His probation, which runs until 2026, was already fragile due to a string of domestic violence and DUI arrests across multiple states.
Each new incident tightens the legal pressure, raising profound concerns about ongoing safety, compliance, and the consequences of repeated violations.
Bryan was serving a 36-month probation sentence for a 2023 domestic violence conviction tied to an altercation that included assault and robbery charges, according to reporting by the Hollywood Reporter.
The terms barred him from contacting the victim without prior approval conditions he allegedly breached over the weekend.
Cartwright, who has previously accused Bryan of violent behavior during a 2020 incident documented in police reports, was charged separately with DUI, reckless endangerment, and attempted first-degree assault. She is scheduled to be arraigned on Monday.
Bryan’s history of arrests stretches across Oregon, California, and Oklahoma, including multiple DUIs in 2024 and a Jan. 1, 2025 arrest in which he was accused of punching a woman and threatening to kill her.
Earlier this month, another ex-partner secured a five-year restraining order after she alleged he punched her in the head.
Just weeks ago, on November 13, Bryan publicly apologized for his “painful wake-up call,” acknowledging decades of struggles linked to early fame, addiction, and poor decision-making.
This case sits squarely within criminal law, specifically probation enforcement and domestic violence restrictions.
When a person is placed on probation for a violent offense, especially domestic violence courts impose strict “no-contact” terms to protect victims. Violating those conditions is treated as a serious breach because it signals potential ongoing risk.
Key evidence includes communications, witness accounts, physical proximity, police observations, and any actions that contradict court-ordered restrictions.
Once a violation is alleged, judges typically review the probation order, the underlying conviction, and the nature of the new conduct.
Procedurally, Bryan’s detention without bail suggests the court believes he poses a significant risk of reoffending or failing to comply.
The next steps include a formal hearing where a judge will determine whether the violation is substantiated and what sanctions are appropriate.
Penalties may range from extended probation to full revocation and jail time.
👉 How a Defense Lawyer Challenges Prosecution Tactics in Domestic Violence Cases 👈
A probation violation for domestic violence can result in the judge revoking probation and imposing the original suspended sentence. Whether that happens depends on the evidence presented, but detention without bail indicates the court views the matter seriously.
Bryan is currently held for violating probation, not a new criminal charge. However, any associated conduct uncovered during the investigation could potentially lead to additional counts.
Courts will evaluate whether Bryan had contact with the victim or engaged in prohibited behavior. Probation violations require a lower evidentiary threshold than criminal trials, meaning prosecutors do not need to prove wrongdoing beyond a reasonable doubt.
Dismissal is possible only if the court finds no actual violation occurred. Given the detention and prior history, that outcome is less common—but still dependent on the facts presented at the hearing.
Probation violation proceedings typically move faster than traditional criminal cases. A decision can occur within days to weeks, depending on court scheduling and the complexity of the alleged breach.
Probation isn’t merely a warning, it is a legally binding alternative to jail that comes with strict court-monitored conditions.
Violating those terms, especially in cases involving domestic violence, is treated with urgency because courts prioritize victim safety.
This case also illustrates why no-contact orders are enforced so tightly. Even unintended or brief contact can constitute a violation, and the burden is on the defendant to avoid prohibited situations.
The legal system treats probation as a privilege: compliance keeps a person in the community, but non-compliance can swiftly restore the original sentence.
Best-case scenario:
The court finds the violation was minor or unintentional, reinstates probation, and imposes additional conditions such as counseling or tighter supervision.
Worst-case scenario:
Probation is revoked entirely, and Bryan serves the full remaining custodial sentence connected to his 2023 conviction. Additional charges could be filed if new criminal conduct is established.
Most common outcome in similar cases:
Courts often extend probation, add stricter compliance requirements, or order short jail stints—but outcomes vary depending on prior history, risk assessment, and the nature of the violation.
Was his girlfriend’s arrest connected to the probation violation?
Cartwright’s charges were separate and stem from her own alleged conduct during the incident. Her arrest occurred alongside Bryan’s but follows a different legal track.
Does a public apology affect probation decisions?
No. Courts base decisions on behavior, evidence, and compliance—not statements to the media.
Can Bryan’s probation be extended beyond 2026?
If the court modifies the terms due to violations, extensions are possible, but only within statutory limits.
Will this impact custody arrangements involving their children?
Any criminal proceeding involving violence or substance abuse can be examined in future family court matters, but such decisions are made separately and on a case-by-case basis.
Zachery Ty Bryan’s latest arrest marks one of the most severe turning points in his long run of legal troubles, especially because it involves an alleged breach of a domestic violence probation order regarded as high-risk by courts.
He remains jailed without bail until Wednesday, when a judge will determine whether the violation is proven and what consequences he faces.
Seeking Sister Wife star Garrick Merrifield was arrested Monday in Chaffee County, Colorado, on a misdemeanor charge of obstructing telephone service, a statute commonly linked to domestic violence cases. He bonded out shortly after, and the case has now entered Colorado’s mandatory domestic-violence protocol. The charge raises immediate questions about evidence, penalties, and the next steps in the legal process.
Reality TV personality Garrick Merrifield was arrested Monday in Chaffee County, Colorado, after an alleged domestic incident that authorities say involved interference with a phone during a moment of distress.
The charge — obstruction of telephone service, long treated in Colorado as a key domestic-violence-related offense — places Merrifield under strict mandatory procedures the moment the domestic-violence tag is applied. Officials confirmed he has already bonded out of jail, but the legal stakes remain high.
The arrest comes only a week after Merrifield and his wives announced the arrival of a new baby girl, intensifying the emotional impact of the case.
Court records show the misdemeanor charge is now moving into its early procedural phase, where prosecutors assess evidence, witness accounts, and the circumstances surrounding the alleged call-interference.
For Merrifield, the episode lands at a moment when his family is expanding and public attention is particularly sharp. For Colorado courts, the next step is an advisement hearing that will determine the boundaries of any protection order and set the timeline for what comes next.
Merrifield was arrested Monday and booked on obstruction of telephone service, a Class 1 misdemeanor under Colorado law. This is the charge typically filed when someone is accused of preventing another person from making or completing a call during a heated or dangerous moment.
He bonded out shortly after, according to officials cited by TMZ. No additional charges have been listed publicly, and the detailed affidavit outlining the allegation has not yet been released.
The case includes a domestic-violence designation. This is not a separate charge, but an enhancer that triggers immediate protections, required court appearances, and specific timelines under Colorado’s domestic-violence protocol.
This case falls within Colorado’s domestic-violence framework, which applies enhanced procedures when a crime is alleged between intimate partners or household members. The underlying offense — obstruction of telephone service — focuses on whether someone interfered with another person’s attempt to call for help.
In these cases, courts assess:
whether a call was blocked or interrupted
the circumstances of the argument
any physical damage to the phone or evidence of attempted calls
the relationship between the people involved
Because the allegation carries a domestic-violence tag, a mandatory protection order is typically issued at the first court appearance. Prosecutors then decide whether to formally file the charge, amend it, or decline it based on the evidence.
Potential penalties for a Class 1 misdemeanor range from fines and probation to up to 364 days in jail, though outcomes vary widely depending on the facts and the defendant’s history.
Jail is possible but not guaranteed. A Class 1 misdemeanor can carry up to 364 days, though many cases without prior history resolve through probation or diversion if the evidence supports it.
Only obstruction of telephone service appears in public records. The domestic-violence tag enhances procedure but does not add a separate criminal count.
The affidavit has not yet been made public. In similar cases, prosecutors rely heavily on witness statements, attempted call logs, phone damage, and any recorded efforts to contact help.
Yes — prosecutors can decline the case if evidence is weak or inconsistent. In Colorado, dismissal is a prosecutorial decision, not the alleged victim’s.
Domestic-violence-tagged misdemeanors often last several weeks to several months, depending on motions, negotiations, and court scheduling.
Colorado law treats interrupted or blocked emergency calls as a serious public-safety issue. Even without physical injury, stopping someone from calling for help can trigger criminal charges and domestic-violence procedures.
A key principle is that interference with communication during a conflict is itself a legally significant act, regardless of how quickly the situation escalated or de-escalated. These cases move quickly through the court system and carry immediate consequences, including protection orders and mandatory hearings.
Best-case scenario:
Prosecutors decline the case or drop it early due to insufficient evidence.
Worst-case scenario:
A conviction for obstruction of telephone service, which may include up to 364 days in jail, fines, probation, and required domestic-violence treatment.
Most common outcome in similar cases:
A negotiated agreement such as probation, deferred judgment, or a plea to a lesser offense — depending entirely on the strength of the evidence and any prior history.
No public statement has been issued by Merrifield at this time.
No. It is an enhancer that attaches to another crime and changes the procedural handling of the case.
Charging documents are generally public unless sealed, but the affidavit may not appear until after prosecutors formally file or amend charges.
No. Bond simply allows release from custody. The case now moves into advisement and prosecutor review.
Garrick Merrifield’s arrest has triggered Colorado’s strict domestic-violence legal process, even though the underlying allegation is a misdemeanor. The case is now in its early stages, with prosecutors reviewing evidence to decide whether to proceed, amend, or dismiss the charge. A protection order is likely in effect, and upcoming hearings will set the tone for the rest of the case. Given the public profile of the parties involved and the sensitivity of the allegation, the legal and public-interest stakes remain high.
👉 Latest: What Legally Counts as Harassment in the U.S.? 👈
👉 Latest: How Criminal Law Really Works: Inside the Principles That Shape Justice in America 👈
A Massachusetts man has been sentenced to life in prison without parole for the brutal murder of his ex-girlfriend.
Bruce Maiben, 48, was convicted of first-degree murder on November 3, 2025, for killing 40-year-old Sherell Pringle, a mother from Woburn who was found dead in Rumney Marsh Reservation in Saugus two days after she went missing on December 19, 2021.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(749x0:751x2):format(webp)/sherell-pringle-1-110725-9cb88ce4857a4ae19d7ec5b24dab0ec6.jpg)
Sherell Pringle - Woburn Police Department
“She had been stabbed more than 217 times,” Boston 25 News reported — a level of violence prosecutors said showed extreme atrocity or cruelty under Massachusetts law.
“This verdict and sentence ensure the defendant will be held accountable for his senseless and atrocious conduct,” said Essex County District Attorney Paul F. Tucker. “We hope the family and friends of Sherell Pringle can find some comfort in this outcome.”
Court records show Pringle texted a friend shortly before her death, saying she was “done with [Maiben]” after he had illegally entered her home and threatened her with a knife, according to Boston.com.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(497x0:499x2):format(webp)/Bruce-Maiben-110725-43fae599b9364887bab3ab33bc381fad.jpg)
Bruce Maiben - Woburn Police Department
Those who knew Sherell described her as ambitious, joyful, and devoted to her teenage son. She loved traveling, shopping, and photography — and had just placed an offer on a new home that was approved days after her death.
At sentencing, her mother, Pearl Garner, faced Maiben in court. “You’re scum,” she said. “I hope you rot in hell for what you did. You don’t deserve to be walking here.”
Garner said her daughter’s funeral had to be closed-casket because of the brutality of the attack — an image no mother should ever have to endure.
Under Massachusetts law, first-degree murder carries an automatic life sentence without the possibility of parole. The charge applies to killings that are premeditated or committed with extreme atrocity or cruelty (Mass. Gen. Laws c. 265, § 1).
Criminal attorney Brad Bailey, a former federal prosecutor, explains:
“In Massachusetts, first-degree murder involves deliberate intent or extreme cruelty. A conviction guarantees life in prison with no chance of parole.”
— Brad Bailey Law, 2024
For Pringle’s family, the sentence represents accountability — but not closure. Her teenage son must now grow up without his mother, while loved ones continue to speak out about the warning signs of intimate-partner violence.
Advocates warn that the moment a victim decides to leave an abuser is often the most dangerous time. Pringle’s final text — “done with him” — tragically echoed that pattern.
If you or someone you know is experiencing threats or violence, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or Massachusetts SafeLink at 1-877-785-2020 for confidential support.
Domestic violence experts say early intervention — reporting stalking, threats, or unlawful entry — can be the difference between safety and tragedy.
Sherell Pringle’s murder is more than a court case — it’s the violent silencing of a woman trying to reclaim her life. Justice may have been served, but peace remains elusive for those she left behind.
Her story stands as a warning about how control can turn to rage and as a plea for awareness. Before the law steps in, there’s a chance to stop the next tragedy — to listen, to believe, and to act.
A Los Angeles judge has officially granted actress Denise Richards a five-year restraining order against her ex-husband, Aaron Phypers, following months of disturbing domestic violence allegations.
The ruling, issued on November 7, 2025, prohibits Phypers, 53, from contacting or harassing Richards, 54, and from possessing firearms. The order will remain in effect until November 7, 2030 and includes provisions preventing him from sharing private images or speaking publicly about his ex-wife.
Richards, known for her roles in Wild Things and The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, first sought a temporary restraining order in July, just days after Phypers filed for divorce. In court testimony, she described a series of violent incidents spanning several years of their six-year marriage — including claims that Phypers had “caused me at least three concussions.”
She recalled one alleged attack in January 2022 that left her with a black eye and another at his California wellness center, where he “slammed me up against the concrete wall.” The most recent alleged assault took place in April 2025 at a Chicago hotel, when, according to Richards, Phypers “was squeezing my head so hard, it felt like he was crushing my skull.”
“He’s almost killed me so many damn times,” Richards told the court, visibly emotional as she detailed the repeated violence and control she says she endured.
Phypers has denied every allegation, calling Richards’ testimony “made up” and claiming that she exaggerated events. He has not been charged with a crime, but the civil restraining order severely limits his actions and contact with her.
Under the court’s decision, Phypers must return Richards’ laptop, delete videos of her medical procedures from all devices, and refrain from releasing any private photos or information to the media. The order also explicitly allows Richards to record any communications between them — a measure designed to ensure her safety.
For Richards, the ruling represents a legal and emotional turning point after years of silence. For many readers, it’s a stark reminder that domestic violence can affect anyone, regardless of fame or fortune.
In California, a Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO) allows victims to seek protection from a spouse, partner, or former partner who has threatened, harassed, or abused them. It can prohibit contact, mandate the surrender of firearms, and even grant temporary control of shared property or custody.
According to the California Courts Self-Help Center, “abuse” doesn’t just mean physical harm — it can include verbal, emotional, or digital harassment that “disturbs the peace” of another person. A judge can grant a temporary order within days and, after a hearing, extend it for up to five years.
Violating a DVRO is a criminal offense in California and can lead to arrest or jail time.
How long can a restraining order last in California?
Up to five years — and it can be renewed before it expires.
Does a restraining order mean someone is guilty of a crime?
No. It’s a civil protection measure, but violating it can lead to criminal charges.
Can restraining orders include digital privacy clauses?
Yes. Courts can restrict sharing of private images or data, as seen in Richards’ case.
Aaron Phypers, the estranged husband of Wild Things star Denise Richards, walked free late Friday after posting a $200,000 bond, just hours after being arrested on spousal abuse charges in Los Angeles.
The 53-year-old was taken into custody by sheriff’s deputies inside a Los Angeles courtroom, where the former couple had appeared for a restraining order hearing.
Hours later, Phypers was photographed leaving the Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station, smiling beside a California bondswoman a striking image for a man newly accused of domestic violence.
“I haven’t seen the criminal complaint yet, but from what I’ve been told, it appears to be the same allegations we’re already fighting,” Phypers’ attorney Michael Finley said in a statement.
“We expect those claims to be proven false and for him to be fully exonerated.”
Witnesses said that Phypers appeared “confused” as deputies handcuffed him after a heated exchange on an escalator.
Denise Richards, 54, reportedly stayed calm, speaking quietly with her legal team while the courtroom descended into chaos.
The judge extended Richards’ temporary restraining order until November 7, when the court will decide whether to make it permanent.
Phypers’ arrest adds another layer of turmoil to a divorce already marked by dueling accusations of abuse, infidelity, and financial manipulation.
In recent testimony, Richards alleged that Phypers caused her “at least three concussions” during their marriage and once gave her a black eye during a 2022 altercation.
“He slammed me up against a concrete wall,” she said in court. “My head hit it so hard I saw stars.”
She claimed another incident in Chicago left her with “crushing pain” after Phypers allegedly “squeezed her head so hard it felt like he was crushing her skull.”
Richards was granted a temporary restraining order in July, shortly after Phypers filed for divorce citing “irreconcilable differences.”
Phypers has repeatedly denied all allegations of violence, telling the court that Richards’ injuries were self-inflicted and caused by falls or alcohol use.
“She bruises easily,” Phypers testified, insisting he never assaulted her.
Denise Richards and Aaron Phypers
He accused the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills alum of fabricating stories to influence their divorce proceedings and damage his reputation.
A source close to Phypers said that Richards’ claims are “fictional” and part of a “media-driven strategy” ahead of upcoming court dates.
While the domestic violence allegations dominate headlines, a new legal battle may define this case in California family law: Phypers is demanding half of Denise Richards’ OnlyFans earnings, arguing they were generated during their marriage.
According to court documents, Richards earns between $200,000 and $300,000 per month from her content on the platform.
Phypers claims he helped take some of the photos, making the income “community property” under California Family Code §760, which states that any income earned during marriage is jointly owned.
Related Reading: Emotional Fraud and Fake DMs: The Class Action Challenging OnlyFans’ Illusion of Intimacy - explore how digital intimacy, online contracts, and consent disputes are redefining privacy law in the age of subscription-based content.
“If the content was created before separation and both parties participated, it could technically qualify as marital property,” explains Los Angeles attorney Jennifer Morales, commenting generally on the case.
“But the adult nature of OnlyFans introduces complex issues around consent, intellectual property, and moral rights.”
If the court agrees with Phypers, it could set a precedent for influencer and adult-content income disputes in future celebrity divorces - a rapidly growing gray area in California’s community property law.
Aaron Phypers’ legal battle highlights two emerging fault lines in California family law, the division of digital assets and the influence of public perception in domestic violence cases.
As more celebrities and influencers monetize platforms like OnlyFans and TikTok, courts are being forced to decide how to classify and divide online income.
Legal analysts note that California’s community property framework was never designed to address monetized personal content or digital intimacy.
When income is generated through platforms like OnlyFans, TikTok, or Patreon, the overlap between intellectual property rights and family law creates an unresolved legal gray area.
This high-profile dispute could compel California courts to clarify how influencer income, digital branding, and creative collaboration are treated in divorce settlements, particularly when both spouses claim joint involvement in the content’s production.
Further Reading: The Dark Side of OnlyFans: Success, Struggles, and Safety Concerns - uncover the legal and ethical challenges facing subscription-based creators, from exploitation risks to data privacy and financial control disputes.
At the same time, Phypers’ arrest inside a Los Angeles courthouse while attending a civil hearing has drawn widespread attention.
Under California Penal Code §836, deputies may execute an arrest warrant in a public or judicial setting if probable cause exists — a lawful but rarely seen action.
While the arrest itself was legally permissible, the optics could prove damaging.
Legal analysts note that being taken into custody in front of a judge can influence how a defendant is perceived, especially in family law proceedings where credibility and conduct weigh heavily on custody and settlement decisions.
Phypers’ defense team argues the arrest was premature and media-driven, while Richards’ lawyers contend it underscores the seriousness of the allegations.
The outcome may not only determine their personal futures but also set broader legal precedent at the crossroads of digital wealth, reputation, and domestic law.
Both Denise Richards and Aaron Phypers are expected to return to Los Angeles Superior Court in November 2025, where the judge will evaluate testimony and evidence surrounding the spousal abuse allegations, restraining order, and OnlyFans income dispute.
Legal observers suggest the outcome could shape how California family courts handle digital income, influencer content, and community property law in the years ahead.
For now, Phypers remains free on bond but faces mounting legal challenges.
His case underscores how modern divorces are forcing courts to balance privacy, digital earnings, and domestic violence allegations in ways that blur the boundaries between fame and family law.
Evolving Definition of Marital Property: California’s Family Code §760 presumes income earned during marriage is shared, but digital earnings and subscription platforms like OnlyFans present new legal questions.
Digital Privacy and Consent: Divorce cases involving monetized personal content raise complex issues around consent, image rights, and data ownership.
Procedural Enforcement in Court: Under Penal Code §836, deputies may execute lawful arrests inside courthouses when probable cause exists — as occurred here.
Impact on Domestic Violence Proceedings: Under Family Code §4320, a proven history of abuse can influence property division, custody, and spousal support outcomes.
Why was Aaron Phypers arrested?
Aaron Phypers was arrested on spousal abuse charges in Los Angeles after appearing in court for a restraining order hearing involving his estranged wife, Denise Richards. He was later released on a $200,000 bond.
What are Denise Richards’ allegations against Aaron Phypers?
Denise Richards alleges that Aaron Phypers physically assaulted her multiple times during their marriage, claiming he caused her concussions and once gave her a black eye during a 2022 altercation.
What is Aaron Phypers accused of in court besides abuse?
In addition to the domestic violence allegations, Phypers has filed a legal claim seeking half of Denise Richards’ OnlyFans income, arguing that the content was created during their marriage and qualifies as community property.
Can a spouse claim OnlyFans income in a California divorce?
Yes, under California Family Code §760, income earned during marriage is generally community property. However, OnlyFans earnings raise new legal questions involving digital privacy, intellectual property, and consent.
What happens next in the Denise Richards and Aaron Phypers case?
Both parties are expected back in Los Angeles Superior Court in November 2025, where the judge will review the restraining order, domestic violence evidence, and financial disputes involving digital assets.
Could this case change California divorce law?
Legal analysts believe the case could set a precedent for how California courts handle influencer income and subscription-based earnings during divorce — especially when both spouses claim involvement in creating digital content.
As Welsh actor Ioan Gruffudd fights to make his restraining order against ex-wife Alice Evans permanent, new court filings and social media revelations expose the emotional wreckage of one of Hollywood’s most poisonous breakups — and what the law really says about love, loss, and protection in California.
When Fantastic Four star Ioan Gruffudd and actress Alice Evans fell in love on the set of 102 Dalmatians two decades ago, they looked like a Hollywood dream. But by 2025, that dream has curdled into a nightmare — one so bitter and public it now spans restraining orders, eviction notices, and accusations of emotional abuse.
In Los Angeles this month, Gruffudd filed to make his restraining order against Evans permanent, claiming she has continued to harass him and his new wife, Bianca Wallace, despite prior court warnings. Evans, 56, fired back on social media, accusing him of “ruining her life” and “leaving her and their daughters destitute.”
According to court documents obtained by The Guardian (July 2025), the restraining order hearing centers on Gruffudd’s allegation that Evans “poses an ongoing threat of harassment,” while Evans argues the order is “unnecessary and punitive.”
The couple met in 2000 while filming Disney’s 102 Dalmatians and married in 2007, welcoming two daughters, Ella and Elsie. Gruffudd, a Welsh actor best known for his role as Mr. Fantastic, saw his career rise with roles in Titanic and King Arthur, while Evans appeared in The Vampire Diaries and Blackball.
But behind the glamour, cracks deepened. In 2021, Gruffudd filed for divorce citing “irreconcilable differences.” Evans claimed she was blindsided and took to Twitter:
“My beloved husband/soulmate of 20 years has announced he is to leave his family next week. Me and our young daughters are confused and sad.”
The tweet went viral, and from that moment, the divorce became a digital battleground. In 2022, Gruffudd was granted a domestic violence restraining order, later extended to protect Wallace after Evans allegedly sent “threatening emails” to Gruffudd’s mother (People, March 2022).
By 2024, Evans’ once-comfortable lifestyle had collapsed. She claimed in court that she was “on the verge of homelessness,” later confirming in July 2025 that she and her daughters had been evicted from their Los Angeles home.
“Four years of hell,” she wrote to her Instagram followers. “Now the girls and I are going to be homeless. Somebody please help.”
Her emotional posts prompted fans to donate nearly $10,000 via GoFundMe. “We could never have done this without the incredible kindness from all of you,” she said later.
Yet Gruffudd insists Evans isn’t as broke as she claims. Court records show she earned $130,000 in 2024, including child support, small acting fees, Cameo videos, and convention appearances (LA Superior Court filings, 2024). Evans disputes the total, saying that after legal fees and basic costs, “there’s nothing left.”
Gruffudd’s own finances have fluctuated wildly. In 2022, he reported just $51,000 in income and debts of $71,000 to French tax authorities. By early 2024, however, he declared a net worth of $2.8 million, thanks in part to film and streaming roles.
He argues his ex-wife’s support demands are unrealistic. He currently pays $4,600 in child support and $2,300 in spousal support per month, though Evans claims even that “doesn’t cover groceries.”
In a shocking court filing last month, Gruffudd alleged Evans had once allowed a drug dealer into their home and “tried to give their children cocaine.” Evans has denied the allegation and called it “a despicable smear tactic.”
Legal analysts suggest the claim may strengthen his attempt to make the restraining order permanent, particularly given that Wallace is now pregnant with their first child.
Friends of Evans told The Sun that she is aware “her car crash relationship is the only thing keeping her relevant.” One insider claimed she’s using her pain “as content” — a claim Evans does not deny.
“I’m not ashamed of my story,” she said recently. “If being honest helps me or my girls survive, then I’ll keep telling the truth.”
Her raw honesty has divided fans. Some praise her for vulnerability; others accuse her of exploiting personal trauma for attention. Meanwhile, Gruffudd has chosen silence, focusing on his career and his new marriage.
His latest film, Bad Boys: Ride or Die, reportedly grossed over $600 million worldwide, and his marriage to Wallace in April 2025 signaled a clean break — at least on paper.
The Gruffudd–Evans saga is more than celebrity gossip — it’s a vivid case study in California family law, where courts must balance personal safety, free expression, and parental rights in high-conflict separations.
Under California Family Code §6345, a restraining order issued after a domestic violence hearing can be extended permanently if the petitioner shows “reasonable apprehension of future abuse.” Judges consider social media posts, digital harassment, and emotional harm — not just physical violence.
Support obligations are set under the California Family Code §4320 factors, including income, health, earning capacity, and “standard of living established during the marriage.” In cases involving actors or freelancers, courts may modify orders frequently due to inconsistent earnings — exactly what’s happened here.
California prioritizes the “best interest of the child” (Family Code §3011). However, when one parent accuses the other of manipulation or drug use — as Gruffudd has — the court can order psychological evaluations, restrict visitation, or appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the children.
Posts that damage reputation or violate prior court orders can be grounds for contempt or order modification. In 2023, the state appellate court in In re Marriage of Candiotti reaffirmed that public disparagement of a co-parent can harm custody outcomes. Evans’ open social media activity could, therefore, have legal consequences if deemed harassing or harmful to the children.
What began as a Hollywood romance has devolved into a legal and emotional cautionary tale — about fame, family, and the perils of turning private pain into public performance.
And while the courts may decide whether Gruffudd’s restraining order becomes permanent, the damage — reputational, emotional, and familial — may already be beyond repair.
What is Ioan Gruffudd’s net worth in 2025?
Around $2.8 million, according to verified financial filings.
Why did Ioan Gruffudd file for a restraining order?
He cited ongoing harassment, threatening messages, and reputational harm from his ex-wife Alice Evans.
Is Alice Evans really broke?
She claims she is, but filings show a mix of spousal support, residuals, and online income totaling over $100,000 annually.
Can restraining orders in California become permanent?
Yes. If evidence shows an ongoing threat or pattern of harassment, a temporary order can be converted into a permanent one.
When Denise Richards stepped into a Los Angeles courtroom this October to testify against her estranged husband, Aaron Phypers, the headlines focused on her tears and accusations. Yet behind the emotion was a powerful example of how California’s courts decide when—and how—to protect victims of domestic violence.
What most people don’t realize is that the same laws protecting celebrities in Beverly Hills apply to anyone—from a nurse in Fresno to a teacher in Bakersfield—who feels unsafe at home. The restraining order is one of the most important tools in family and criminal law, separating safety from danger when evidence and emotion collide.
According to the Judicial Council of California’s 2024 Court Statistics Report, state courts handle tens of thousands of domestic violence restraining order petitions every year. While celebrity cases like Richards’ draw national headlines, they reflect the same legal process that thousands of ordinary families navigate quietly and without cameras.
A restraining order, often called a protective order, isn’t meant to punish—it’s meant to prevent. It restricts contact or proximity between two people when abuse, threats, or harassment have been alleged.
California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act defines abuse broadly. It includes physical harm, stalking, and threats, but also “disturbing the peace” through intimidation or controlling behavior. As The Guardian reported in a 2023 analysis of coercive control laws, modern courts increasingly recognize psychological abuse as a legitimate form of domestic violence.
Victims can request several types of protection:
Emergency Protective Orders, issued by police in moments of immediate danger.
Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs), granted quickly by a judge based on sworn statements.
Long-Term or Permanent Orders, decided after both parties testify and evidence is reviewed.
Each order may require no contact, enforce distance rules, or compel the surrender of firearms. For public figures like Richards, those boundaries are harder to maintain under media scrutiny—but legally, the rules are the same for everyone.
Temporary restraining orders are designed for speed. Judges can approve one the same day a petition is filed if there’s credible fear of harm. Hearings follow within about three weeks, when both parties present their side.
At that point, the judge must decide whether to extend the order or dissolve it. The standard of proof is “preponderance of the evidence”—a lower threshold than the “beyond reasonable doubt” required in criminal cases.
According to the California Courts Self-Help Center, acceptable evidence can include photos, texts, medical notes, and testimony about emotional distress. Courts understand that domestic violence often leaves no visible injuries. If granted, a permanent order can last up to five years and be renewed before expiration. Violating one—through a call, text, or visit—can result in arrest and prosecution.
Family law judges must interpret complex human relationships through evidence. They look for patterns, not perfection. Some of the key considerations include:
Tangible Evidence: Photos, messages, and medical documentation help establish a consistent timeline.
Behavioral Patterns: Efforts to move out, change locks, or notify friends suggest genuine fear.
Psychological Impact: Emotional confusion or distress can align with trauma rather than dishonesty.
Respondent Conduct: Cooperation with orders and calm courtroom behavior influence credibility.
Coercive Control: Financial domination, isolation, or surveillance are now seen as abuse indicators.
As several Los Angeles judges told The New York Times in past reporting, the law has evolved to treat fear itself as evidence when that fear is credible and sustained.
Judges are equally cautious about restraining orders being used strategically in divorces or custody disputes. California’s judicial guidance warns that protective orders should never become a weapon in emotional litigation.
Courts look closely for corroborating evidence, consistent testimony, and third-party verification before granting a permanent order. This balance—protecting victims while preventing misuse—reflects the fairness principles at the heart of California family law.
Visit your county superior court or the California Courts Self-Help Center website.
Complete Form DV-100 (Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order) and DV-110 (Temporary Order).
Submit your forms to the clerk for a judge’s review—often the same day.
If approved, law enforcement will serve the order on the other party.
Attend the full hearing, usually scheduled within 20 to 25 days.
Many survivors wonder why an accused abuser isn’t automatically arrested once a restraining order is issued. That’s because restraining orders are civil remedies—they provide protection but don’t assign guilt. Criminal prosecution requires a separate investigation and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, once a restraining order is in place, violating it becomes a criminal offense under California Penal Code Section 273.6. This structure allows victims to gain quick civil protection while still giving prosecutors time to build a criminal case if necessary.
Celebrity trials blur the line between justice and entertainment. When Denise Richards testified that she feared for her life—claims that Aaron Phypers denies—she echoed what countless survivors describe in family courts across the country: fear, confusion, and disbelief that love could turn dangerous.
For lawyers and judges, such cases remind the public that restraining orders aren’t moral judgments but constitutional rights. While fame amplifies visibility, the legal standards don’t change. Every petition, whether filed by a public figure or a private citizen, carries the same weight before the law.
Filing for a restraining order can be daunting, especially when trauma is recent. But for many, it is the difference between fear and freedom.
Studies cited by The Guardian show that states with streamlined restraining order systems have lower rates of repeat violence. California’s e-filing and remote testimony options make the process more accessible and less intimidating.
A restraining order can’t guarantee safety, but it creates a legal record that police and courts must respect. It establishes accountability—a clear warning that harassment, intimidation, or abuse will have consequences.
Domestic protection now extends far beyond physical proximity. Under the federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), restraining orders issued in one state are enforceable in all fifty, including against online harassment. Cyberstalking, threats via text, or digital monitoring can all fall under the same legal protections as physical violence.
As technology blurs boundaries, courts are adapting to recognize that abuse can happen through screens as easily as behind closed doors.
Every domestic violence hearing represents a person asking the law for protection—and trusting it to deliver. For every high-profile case, there are thousands of unseen hearings where ordinary people take the same step Denise Richards did: documenting, filing, and waiting for justice.
The lesson is clear. Restraining orders are not weapons; they are shields. They exist to give victims breathing space, time to heal, and the assurance that the law stands beside them when fear becomes unbearable.
No one should have to wait for tragedy to seek help. The law already provides the means—what matters most is knowing how, when, and why to use it.
Legal Explainer: What a California Restraining Order Does
Duration: Temporary orders last about 20–25 days until a hearing.
Extensions: Permanent orders can last up to five years and be renewed.
Penalties: Violating an order can lead to arrest, fines, or jail.
Scope: Can include no-contact, distance limits, and firearm removal.
Sources: California Family Code §§6200–6389; California Courts Self-Help Center.
How long does it take to get a restraining order in California?
Usually within one business day for temporary protection, with full hearings scheduled in about three weeks.
Can a restraining order affect child custody?
Yes. Judges may include temporary custody or visitation terms if children are involved.
Can restraining orders be mutual?
Only if both parties file separately and the judge finds abuse on both sides. California discourages one-size-fits-all mutual orders.
LOS ANGELES — The bitter divorce between actress Denise Richards and her estranged husband Aaron Phypers has taken a darker turn inside a Los Angeles courtroom, where both sides are trading explosive accusations of abuse and deception. Phypers, 53, took the stand this week to flatly deny allegations that he physically assaulted the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills alum during their six-year marriage.
The testimony comes as Richards, 54, seeks to make a temporary restraining order permanent, alleging years of violence, threats, and intimidation. The hearing, held before Judge Mark A. Juhas, saw both the actress and her former partner give sharply conflicting accounts of what happened behind closed doors.
Dressed in an aquamarine tweed suit with her hair swept into an elegant updo, Richards became visibly emotional as she described what she called a pattern of escalating violence.
“Aaron has hit me so much during our marriage it became normal for our arguments,” she said on the stand, according to courtroom reporters.
She recounted multiple alleged assaults, including one that left her with a black eye in January 2022 and another that she said caused a concussion during an April 2025 trip to Chicago. Photographs entered into evidence showed a deep purple bruise covering her eyelid and cheekbone.
Richards told the court she concealed the injuries from her daughters and avoided medical treatment out of fear. “I didn’t want to get Aaron in trouble,” she explained. “I wore sunglasses and hid it.”
When it was his turn to testify, Phypers denied ever striking or threatening Richards. Speaking under oath, he said the black eye was self-inflicted while she was intoxicated, adding, “I don’t abuse my wife, no.”
Outside court, he told The Daily Mail that he feels confident the truth will emerge: “There’s a notion out there to ‘believe women,’ but all of them? Some lie — and this one, she’s lying. The truth will set you free.”
His attorney, Michael Finley, motioned to dissolve the temporary restraining order, but Judge Juhas swiftly denied the request. Finley later confirmed that Charlie Sheen — Richards’ ex-husband — and former castmate Brandi Glanville were listed as potential witnesses to testify about Richards’ alleged “history of not being truthful” and substance use.
In prior filings, Richards accused Phypers of inflicting three concussions, “violently choking” her, and threatening to “disappear” her. She also alleged he once slammed her head into a wall at his wellness center and regularly called her degrading names during fights.
Her cousin, Kathleen McAllister, supported the claims in virtual testimony earlier in the week, saying she witnessed Phypers strike Richards hard enough to give her a black eye. “I’m still in shock to this day about it,” McAllister said.
Richards told the court that she often feared for her life. “He’s almost killed me so many times,” she said, claiming Phypers would threaten to throw her “through windows and off balconies.”
Phypers has maintained that Richards fabricated the abuse as part of a custody and divorce strategy. A source close to him described the actress’ testimony as “fiction” and said he intends to “emerge victorious.”
In a September 15 filing, Phypers alleged that Richards had “attacked and harassed” him on multiple occasions and that she was projecting her own aggression onto him.
During the hearing, Phypers’ legal team played a video recorded by Richards in August, in which she compared her marriage to Phypers with her previous relationship to Charlie Sheen.
“Things were bad with Charlie and me,” she said in the clip, “but he never hit below the belt.” She then accused Phypers of infidelity and expressed heartbreak over the collapse of their marriage: “I really thought you were my soulmate. You’ve hit me too many times, and each time it’s getting worse.”
The video appeared to move Richards to tears as it played in court.
Cases like Denise Richards v. Aaron Phypers sit at a tense intersection between family law and criminal law, where domestic-violence allegations can directly shape the outcome of a divorce. In California, claims of physical or emotional abuse can influence spousal-support rulings, child-custody arrangements, and even property division if a judge finds evidence of coercive control.
Under California Family Code §6320, a temporary restraining order—like the one Richards obtained in July—may be issued when there is “reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse.” While such orders are civil in nature, the same evidence can also be used to pursue criminal charges if law enforcement identifies probable cause for assault, battery, or criminal threats.
The legal standards differ. In civil proceedings, judges decide based on a preponderance of evidence, while in criminal prosecutions, guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That distinction explains why some domestic-violence disputes remain in family court even when the allegations sound severe.
Legal analysts say high-profile divorces often blur those boundaries. Family courts may issue protective orders while separate criminal inquiries weigh possible charges. For both sides, false testimony carries perjury risk, and proven abuse can lead to firearm bans, loss of custody, and reputational damage that lasts long after the case ends.
Ultimately, the Richards–Phypers case underscores the complex overlap between personal safety, public image, and the law — where truth and credibility are tested under oath.
| Legal Explainer: What a California Restraining Order Does |
| A restraining order is a court-issued protection that can restrict an accused abuser from contacting, approaching, or harassing the petitioner. |
| ✅ Duration: Temporary orders usually last 20–25 days until a full hearing. |
| ✅ Extensions: If granted after the hearing, a permanent order can last up to 5 years and be renewed. |
| ✅ Penalties: Violating an order can lead to criminal arrest, fines, and jail time. |
| ✅ Scope: It may include no-contact rules, distance requirements, or removal of firearms. |
| Sources: California Family Code §§6200–6389; California Courts Self-Help Center. |
Judge Juhas is expected to review further evidence before deciding whether to extend Richards’ restraining order beyond its temporary term. Witness testimony — potentially from Sheen and Glanville — may resume later this month if Phypers’ team introduces new claims.
For now, both parties remain under the court’s existing protective orders, and the case continues to draw widespread attention as one of the most contentious celebrity domestic-violence proceedings of 2025.
What did Denise Richards accuse Aaron Phypers of?
She alleges multiple instances of physical and emotional abuse, including being hit, choked, and threatened during their six-year marriage.
What does Aaron Phypers say in response?
Phypers denies all allegations, claiming Richards fabricated the incidents and injured herself while under the influence.
Is Denise Richards’ restraining order permanent?
Not yet. The temporary restraining order, granted in July 2025, remains in effect pending further court hearings.
Will Charlie Sheen testify in the case?
Sheen was named as a potential witness by Phypers’ legal team, though the court has not yet confirmed if or when he will appear.
A defense lawyer's role is to ensure every person accused of committing a crime receives a fair trial. This responsibility is especially critical in sensitive situations like domestic violence charges. Prosecutors pursue these cases aggressively, but defense attorneys have strategies to balance the scales.
In many domestic violence cases, the outcome depends not just on the facts but on how each side presents them. Defense lawyers know the prosecution will lean on emotional narratives, witness testimony, and sometimes limited physical evidence. Their challenge is to test the strength of that evidence and expose weaknesses where they exist.
Witness testimony is the backbone of a domestic violence charge. But people make mistakes, and memories fade or shift under stress. Defense lawyers carefully compare statements given at different times, to police, in depositions, or in court, to highlight inconsistencies.
They may also bring up the witness’s relationship with the accused. Was there a custody battle, a financial dispute, or lingering resentment? These details matter. A credible witness can sway a jury, but a shaky or biased account can just as easily unravel a prosecution’s case.
Pictures of injuries, torn clothing, or damaged property usually carry emotional weight. But defense lawyers know evidence must be tied directly to the incident. For example, bruises could have come from another event, or property damage could have been caused accidentally.
Attorneys also look closely at how evidence was collected and stored. If the chain of custody isn’t airtight, the reliability of that evidence can be attacked. By poking holes in how evidence was handled, defense lawyers weaken the prosecution’s narrative.
Police officers must follow proper procedures during an arrest or investigation. When they don’t, defense lawyers take notice. Common issues include:
These errors may seem technical, but they can significantly affect the outcome. If evidence was gathered unlawfully, it may be excluded entirely.
Many domestic violence laws require proof that the accused intended harm. Defense lawyers argue the situation was accidental, for example, an injury that happened during a heated argument without physical intent.
Attorneys show the difference between poor judgment in the heat of the moment and an actual crime through framing the event in context. Courts must see intent clearly before convicting.
Defense lawyers sometimes present scenarios that fit the evidence just as well as the prosecution's version. Alternative explanations may include self-defense, mutual involvement in the confrontation, or injuries unrelated to the alleged incident.
These alternatives create reasonable doubt, which is all the defense needs to prevent a conviction.
Experts usually provide the critical edge in court. A medical professional might testify that an injury’s shape or timing doesn’t match the prosecution’s claims. A psychologist might explain how stress or fear can distort a witness’s memory. Forensic experts might challenge the way evidence was analyzed.
Defense lawyers give judges and juries a more profound understanding beyond surface-level facts when they introduce these voices.
Not every case goes to trial. In some situations, plea negotiation benefits the accused more than a courtroom battle. Defense lawyers can work out plea deals that reduce charges, lower penalties, or involve counseling and education programs instead of jail time.
This doesn't mean giving up. It means using a strategy. Sometimes, a carefully negotiated outcome protects a client's future better than risking the uncertainties of trial.
Defense lawyers challenge prosecution tactics in domestic violence cases by:
Each strategy ensures that the accused is treated fairly, and that justice is based on facts and law, not just emotion.
