Defendant's Attorney:

Description:

Bowling Green, Kentucky family law lawyers represented the Plaintiff and the Defendant in a domestic violence dispute.

Kierston J. Harrod filed a petition for an order of protection on June 6, 2024. Therein, she alleged that Dowlen, her ex-boyfriend, had told her if he couldn't have her, nobody could; he had threatened to hurt her; and he had previously shoved her into a wall. An emergency protective order was entered, and the matter was set for a hearing on June 17. At the hearing, Harrod was the only witness and requested that Dowlen be restrained from coming within 500 feet of her for a period of one year.

She testified they had been in a relationship for two and a half years and had briefly lived together. They had broken off their relationship in March 2024. She testified he had since called and texted her with statements such as "if I can't have you, nobody can" and repeatedly told her he knew where she and her family members lived. She stated he became upset when she planned a party and did not invite him, and he threatened to come anyway. She testified the push against the wall had occurred while they were still together in November 2023, and she described it as "not serious." She concluded her proof by sharing screen shots of several calls and texts and playing an audio recording laced with profanity, in which Dowlen told her he knew where she stayed and that if she called the police, someone was going to jail.

At the conclusion of her direct testimony, the family court asked Dowlen if he had any questions of her or if he wished to testify. He declined both offers. The court queried, "so you are not contesting any of this or entry of this petition?" Dowlen responded, "No, sir."

The family court then outlined the definitions and requirements of the domestic violence statute and orally stated it found by a preponderance of the evidence that domestic violence had occurred and may occur again in the future. The family court found there had been constant threats and calls, and the testimony confirmed Harrod feared Dowlen and he had intended to frighten her with those contacts. The court restrained Dowlen from further threats or contact with Harrod and from coming within 500 feet of her. The DVO was entered for a period of one year, until June 17, 2025.

* * *


A family court is authorized to issue a DVO if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that domestic violence has occurred and may again occur. Kentucky Revised Statute ("KRS") 403.740(1); Bissell v. Baumgardner,
236 S.W.3d 24, 29 (Ky. App. 2007). Domestic violence is defined in KRS 403.720(2) and includes any physical injury, stalking, sexual abuse, assault, or infliction of fear of imminent physical injury. Here, Harrod testified to one single occasion of physical injury and acknowledged this had happened several months prior to the filing of her petition. However, she also testified that since they had terminated their relationship and just prior to the filing of the petition, Dowlen had threatened to show up at a party and threatened her with harm. The family court listened to the voicemail message and found the purpose of the call and the texts was to frighten Harrod. The court specifically found by a preponderance of the evidence that domestic violence had occurred and that it could again. KRS 403.740(1) provides that if a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that domestic violence has occurred and may again occur, the court may issue a DVO.

Dowlen v. Harrod, 2024-CA-0834-ME (Ky. Ct. App. Nov 15, 2024)

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: