Birthday gift turns sour for ex-partner
A former labourer from Wigan has been slapped with a nine-week curfew after he tried to give his former partner Â£60 for her birthday.
Peter Kay, 43, insisted he thought he was doing the right thing when he asked his son’s partner to pass on the money, Wigan magistrates were told.
But Annette Kay had a restraining order out on her estranged husband after he was convicted of assaulting her last December.
She later told police that he had never usually given her gifts, when they had been together, and the approach had left her worried and disturbed.
Mrs Kay said to officers: “I am terrified of him and just want to put him to the back of my mind and get on with my life.”
Peter Kay, of Dumbarton Grove, Beech Hill, admitted breach of a restraining order and breach of a 26-week suspended prison sentence, imposed for assaulting his ex-partner.
Magistrates imposed a 7pm to 7am curfew on the defendant and warned him that he had come close to going to prison for the offence.
He was also ordered to pay £85 court costs and a three-year restraining order, in place following the assault conviction, was extended by 12 months to run until February 2020.
The court heard the victim alleged she had been the victim of domestic abuse by the defendant for 30 years, a claim he disputed.
Angela Deakin, prosecuting, said the defendant approached Deborah Haliwell at a bingo hall and asked her to pass on £60 for his estranged partner’s birthday.
She told him she was uncertain whether this would be allowed but agreed to pass on the money. The cash was passed to Mrs Kay via her son.
Miss Deakin said Annette Kay became upset, when the money was passed to her with the explanation.
She said the approach had left her “shaken” and wondering what his motivation might be, the court heard.
The defendant was arrested on June 8 and he immediately told police that he thought his restraining order only meant he was not supposed to talk to his former partner.
Miss Deakin said that while the circumstances of the offence were admittedly unusual “the restraining order is in place for good reason”.
Questioned by police, Mrs Kay said that the defendant had never sent her birthday or Christmas presents before, often preferring to buy them something which they both could use.
If he had ever handed any money over, it was never usually more than £20 or so.
Bob Topping, defending, said: “I have been in this job for quite a few years and I think that this is the most unusual breach of a restraining order which I have ever come across.”
Mr Topping told the court that while he did not wish to minimise the complainant’s suffering but he found her response “disproportionate” to his client’s actions.
“He thought, as her birthday was approaching, that this would be a nice gesture, to give her a present,” he added.
The court heard that if the money was not welcomed by his former partner then the defendant would have liked to see the money redistributed among their grandchildren.
Mr Topping said he had asked the police officer in the case what had happened to the money but its ultimate fate remained unclear.
He also told the court that while Kay was technically in breach of a suspended sentence order “I cannot think of a more minor breach”.