MOUNT VERNON — A state appeals panel has upheld a lower court’s order of protection granted to a woman who said she was in an abusive relationship.
On Feb. 13, 2019, St. Clair County Circuit Court Judge Tameeka Purchase granted a plenary order of protection in favor of Peggy Foster. The respondent in that motion, Norman Statham, challenged Purchase’s decision in the Fifth District Appellate Court.
Justice James Moore wrote the panel’s opinion on that challenge, issued Dec. 30. Justices Judy Cates and Mark Boie concurred.
| Wikimedia Commons, St. Louis Circuit Attorney's Office
Foster filed for an emergency order of protection on Dec. 4, 2018, which was granted in anticipating of the plenary hearing. At that session, Foster said she and Statham had dated on and off for a decade and described their relationship as “very verbally abusive.” She also testified about an August 2015 physical altercation that “ensued after Statham called her a racial slur,” Moore said, noting the incident drew a police response resulting in Statham’s arrest.
Statham’s appeal argument was that Purchase erred by issuing a protective order without sufficient evidence. The panel disagreed.
“The images of her person taken by responding law enforcement following the altercation that day confirm the injuries claimed and were submitted as exhibits before the trial court,” Moore said of the 2015 incident. “The arrest, injuries and images are not disputed by Statham. Statham’s only defense is that Foster escalated the altercation and turned it physical by throwing a radio at him after he called her a racial slur. He argues that he only used reasonable force in defending himself from her attack.”
The panel said that one incident was enough to justify Purchase’s decision, but analyzed other evidence from the hearing testimony that supported a finding of harassment, such as threatening physical conduct, repeated and derogatory text messages and phone calls, Statham parking outside Foster’s home during Thanksgiving and other actions that caused emotional distress.
“Given the testimony present in this case, especially when viewed as a whole, the trial court’s conclusion that Foster had been abused and that an order of protection was necessary was not against manifest weight of the evidence,” Moore said.
The panel affirmed the order of protection.