A father who introduced a five metre social distancing rule in his family home to avoid his wife and children during a lockdown divorce has won an appeal against his controlling behaviour conviction.
Peter Copland, 66, allocated time slots for his wife Maire and their two children to use the kitchen at their home in Paignton, Devon, after the couple separated during the coronavirus pandemic.
The retired engineer brought the rules in between April and August 2020 as the pair divorced after 33 years of marriage. He sent her emails about the five metre rule – which started out as the two metre rule – and the time schedule to the use the kitchen and other rooms in the property.
Exeter Magistrates Court convicted him of coercive and controlling behaviour following a trial and ruled that the break up rules were inflexible and became ‘intimidating and domineering’.
But Mr Copland, of Coalville, Leicestershire, successfully appealed against the conviction and sentence this week.
Prosecutor Herc Ashworth previously told the appeal judge that Mr Copland ‘wanted a five metre distance from him at all times’.
Peter Copland, 66, arranged time slots for when his wife and children could use the large kitchen in their family home, Exeter Crown Court heard
He previously told the court that the rules included allocating different rooms in the house for his wife, daughter Jessica, 22, and son James, 19.
The court heard that there were two separate altercations with James and Jessica in the kitchen in August 2020.
It was claimed that Mr Copland was ‘aggressive’ and caused a commotion when James went into the 20 foot square kitchen for a drink on a 30 degree day, when it was not his time to go in there.
The same thing happened again when Jessica went into the kitchen to get some keys, Mr Ashworth told the court.
Ex-wife Marie said: ‘He kept on saying ‘get out’ and ‘it’s my time’. And shouted at me to get out’.
She said the kitchen rules rushed her to prepare meals, and that she and her children had to take drinks and snacks to their allocated bedrooms in the event they were hungry or thirsty during Mr Copland’s time slot in the kitchen.
‘It was not ideal at all’, she said. ‘He was always right, because it was his rules’.
She added that she wanted to shield her children from his behaviour and to ‘keep the peace’ in the household.
She added that her husband planned to leave the family in ‘two to three years time’ as he had no plans for them in his retirement, and aimed to leave ‘when all the money had run out’.
Exeter Magistrates Court (pictured) initially convicted him of coercive and controlling behaviour following a trial and ruled that the break up rules were inflexible and became ‘intimidating and domineering’
Mr Copland wanted to ‘keep the peace and avoid arguments’ with his wife and children, the court heard
Barrister Tom Faulkner, representing Mr Copland, argued there was no case to answer.
He said Mr Copland also wanted to ‘keep the peace and avoid arguments’ with his wife and children. He also said Mr Copland was vulnerable to Coronavirus and wanted to preserve social distancing as instructed by the Government in the early days of the pandemic.
He said Copland wanted to ‘keep the peace and avoid arguments’ with his wife and his children.
He added that Mr Copland had asked for a five metre rule because his children had not respected the two metre rule – and by extending it he hoped they would stay two metres away.
Judge Kevin de Haan KC and two magistrates quashed the two convictions which included controlling behaviour and an assault on his wife.
He said Copland and his wife had exchanged e mails about social distancing, which showed common sense in their large house in Paignton.
The judge said the problems arose from the animosity of the children to their father saying: ‘They had come to hate him.’
He said it was difficult in the pandemic to get youngsters to conform to social distancing rules, adding: ‘They would not respect the arrangements made by their parents’.
Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com
