JUDGMENT
2
child. She has sent a large number of intemperate and
emotional messages to the first applicant based on what
seems to have been the very messy ending of their
relationship and her belief s about the paternity of the child.
It is difficult to detect in any of the messages any real
physical threat, either to the applicant or to his wife.
Properly evaluated, the messages are no more than the
angry, hurt musings of someone who feels that she has
been let down by her ex -lover.
I am confident that this is the correct conclusion, not
10
only because I have read the messages, but also because
the applicant has already approached a magistrate for
interim relief in terms of the protection from Harassment Act
or the Domestic Violence Act (i t is not clear on this papers
which legislation was engaged ). T he magistrate declined to
provide interim relief. That seems to me to be a good
indication, together with the text of the messages
themselves, that the applicant ’s fears are somewhat
overblown.
There is, in any event, a return day in terms of the
20
interim protection proceedings, which comes up next week.
In those proceedings, the magistrate will be asked again to
provide such relief as they consider appropriate. There is
no basis whatsoever set out on the papers that would justify
my interference midstream with proceedings that have