“Bullet Points”
- Extended Protection: Megan Thee Stallion wins a five-year restraining order against Tory Lanez.
- Fear of Recurrence: Megan testified that she fears Lanez will shoot her again.
- Legal Precedent: The ruling draws parallels with Perez v. Torres-Hernandez, emphasizing the impact of abuse on emotional well-being.
By Samuel A. Lopez – USA Herald
[LOS ANGELES, CA] – As a former sr. family law paralegal and Legal Analyst, I’ve seen firsthand how restraining orders can be a double-edged sword. They are vital tools for protecting individuals from harm, but they can also be misused by parties seeking to gain a tactical, legal advantage over the alleged abuser. In Megan’s case, the court’s decision highlights the importance of protecting victims from ongoing trauma, even when the abuser is behind bars.
Indirect Contact and “Peace of Mind”
In the initial restraining order, the judge prohibited Lanez from having any form of contact, direct or indirect, with Megan. Megan’s petition for an extended restraining order, centered on Lanez’s alleged attempts to contact bloggers to spread negative stories about her. Her legal team argued that this constituted “indirect” contact, a violation of the existing restraining order, which was the basis for their requesting that it be extended by another 5-years.
More significantly, Megan expressed her fear that Lanez would harm her again. “I feel like maybe he’ll shoot me again, and maybe this time I won’t make it,” she testified. This fear, rooted in Lanez’s past actions, formed the legal basis for the extended restraining order.
Under California law, a restraining order can be granted if the petitioner demonstrates a “reasonable apprehension of future abuse.” This apprehension can be based on conduct that violates the victim’s “peace of mind.” As Megan’s complaint stated, Lanez’s actions amounted to a violation of her peace of mind, a key element supported by legal precedent.
Perez v. Torres-Hernandez: A Relevant Case
The case of Perez v. Torres-Hernandez, 1 Cal.App.5th 389, is particularly relevant here. In Perez, the court held that the abuser’s conduct constituted abuse because it “destroyed [her] emotional calm and made her fear for her safety.” This aligns perfectly with Megan’s situation, where Lanez’s actions, even from prison, continue to inflict emotional distress and fear.
As the Perez court stated, the fact that the abuse destroyed the victim’s emotional calm and made her fear for her safety was relevant to establishing a reasonable apprehension of future abuse, as required for renewal of the restraining order. Cal. Fam. Code § 6345(a). Perez v. Torres-Hernandez, 1 Cal.App.5th 389. Megan’s lawyer argued, and the judge seemed to agree, that Lanez’s history of violence, coupled with his continued attempts to harass her, created a well-founded fear for her safety. This fear justifies the extended protection granted by the court.
A Five-Year Order of Protection
On January 9, 2025, the Judge granted Megan’s request, prohibiting Lanez from contacting her “directly or indirectly” until January 9, 2030. This order provides Megan with a significant measure of protection, though it’s worth noting that Lanez will not be eligible for parole until September 2029.
Megan initially filed the restraining order in December 2024, alleging that Lanez continued to subject her to “repeated trauma and revictimization,” even while behind bars. The court agreed, recognizing the ongoing threat posed by Lanez’s actions. In December 2022, Lanez was found guilty of shooting Megan in the foot in July 2020, a crime for which he received a 10-year prison sentence. Despite his conviction, Lanez’s legal team maintains his innocence and is exploring an appeal.
The Probability of Success on Appeal
Success on appeal for Tory Lanez would largely depend on the specific legal arguments his defense team would raise. Some of those factors and legal argument might be:
