Is the guy is forbidden to contact his wife, why was she in his contact list to begin with?

What judge would throw a guy in jail for that? I guess if he had a bunch of warnings and had contacted her multiple times already, but still, a warning would suffice.

This is something that is clearly not his fault. Jailed for 7 days? They should throw his wife in all male prison for 7 days. Shame on her for reporting what is obviously an automated message.
Reading further the injunction was granted because he was sending sappy text messages to his ex wife. ie:“I beg you, please don’t sleep with someone else. We need to sort this out.”
Obviously the law has to start staying ahead of the technology curve and stop giving women the benefit of doubt in all cases. Contrary to popular believe women can abuse their husbands. Then can sleep with anyone they want at the snap of their fingers then rub it in their "lover's face". Or they can be physically abusive and if the man hits back have him thrown in prison. Or worst they can simply fabricate a story, cry in front of a judge and get everything they want. Who is defending the good men out there from their emotionally unstable women?

ouch.

lol

So screw the guy for an oops. I suppose technically it wasn't him contacting her directly, but of course, who knows the specifics of the injunction. But come on...

sucks for him

Seems excessive, but it wasn't terribly smart to have her listed in his address book. It would have been funny if it was a virus that hijacks email accounts that sent the message.

I cant say it enough: Use sites like facebook, myspace etc. at YOUR own risk!

Such things happen. She's being a jerk.

OWNED!

Now to stalk his wife.

This case should have never been prosecuted and this man should not have been allowed to go on. Why? Because it was not him that was contacting this woman, it was Facebook, therefore the e-mail did not come from him, ergo he was not contacting her, Facebook was.

Simply put.... It's a case that any two bit attorney could get thrown out of court or even a normal person could get thrown out of court.

Its a slap on the wrist for not taking due care.

besides, what if this guy is a psycho? Would ya feel sorry for him then after he chopped off his wife's head?

Should have been longer!! Seriously this guy was an idiot. I dont care if the response was automated or not, he should have gotten more time for being just plain stupid.

hahah he got owned hardcore

I don't have a facebook account but I agree with "boo" in adding this guy as a friend.
Now, I don't know how things are in facebook, but my early experience tells me people can register on social networking sites over previously used and known to friends e-mail address but don't ask for a link in the e-mail to be clicked for confirmation. So basically I can just open eg. facebook and sign up for a "friend" who's e-mail I know and become part of an already started network of friends (unless he/she already created an account at that particular social networking site). And they won't even know, because probably it will go to the spam folder, or among 100 other inbox mail that won't be read. Even if they read, I'd still have at least a couple of hours to achieve my mischief. And this is only the version where I don't create a new identity from the ground up. You know those who change their addresses (and/or phone numbers) due to whatever reason, and then inform you of the change via the new address? I could well do that. I can just get a list of addresses from a group forwarded e-mail and send an e-mail like:
Dear folks, I won't be using my old This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it mail anymore. You can reach me at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it instead. Bye.
So, the main responsibility of having a common sense falls to the receivers of mail, not to the sender. No need to blame social networking or mail services, just your own contact. You may even send an e-mail like the This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it I mentioned before and see who of your own contacts will fall for it. And when it comes to automatic messages, it is just stoop!d. This is an example when I'd say "go sue them for being stupid" (meaning the local legal system and of course the ex-wife). If only humans were more like vuclans. This man logically needs to forget every connection the female in question has with his past, present and future.

Well, while this is kinda stupid, since he didn't do it on purpose, you've gotta ask the question, what did the guy do in the first place that made his wife get an injunction against him?

due care being to delete the women he used to be married to?

Sounds like a RIAA style judge to me.

I agree with the earlier comments by joe, though statistically there are fewer cases reported of spouse abuse against males by female partners the cases have proven that in these circumstances that woman have often times been more violent in their crime.
This points out a number of underlying issues... are men not reporting minor incidents or emotional abuse?
Are men more likely to not have their case dismissed for minor things like a simple slap instead of the more violent cases were there is bruising, broken bones or the use of an implement?
Even with the feminist movement supposedly creating equal rights men still are expected to act in traditional ways which includes taking the lead in matters of courtship so in essence any woman of suitable appeal can walk into a bar an find someone to try and make their ex jealous.
The point is the man has a strong basis for an appeal based on cultural biast of the court and the fact that the act was not instigated by him but by a third party without clear direction or control on his part.
Personally i'm a strong believer in teaching people lessons by making the gain from wrongdoings adversly disproportionate to their contraindicate.
If he does not have the ruling thrown out he should go to a country where his country does not have jurisdiction and post every indecent shot of her on the web, make up a web page searchable on google by her name listing all her secrets, wether she ever stole something from who etc. all the dirt including links to a copy of said indecent pictures.
Hopefully this would impact her future career prospect or even her current career in fact creating a fine like affect for her life for social misconduct.
And before you say it out of jurisdiction!

I agree with Joe.

It is common practice for women (and men--sometimes) to get an injunction on the other spouse/ex-spouse during divorce procedings.

3 days is more than what he should have had to do. After this it wouldn't surprise me if he does go psycho and sniper her like that guy did in the US a couple months ago to his estranged ex wife. Yeah he was dumb to keep her contacts, even dumber to access facebook (stupid social sites), but she is outright retarded for having reported this and put him in jail over it. Karma will catch up to her one way or another eventually even if he doesn't do anything to her.

He probably got some crusty old judge that can't even turn a computer on, much less use a social networking sight. I'll bet that he desperately tried to explain the automation of the sight while the judge just huffed about how the guy was using one of those evil computers to stalk his ex wife.

I would say his wife truly is E-Strange! The judge as well.