Domestic Violence Actions are contained in Division 10 of the California Family Code starting with section 6200.
Any action brought under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act must satisfy the statutory definition of Abuse under section 6203 and be perpetrated against one of the persons enumerated under section 6211 of the Family Code.
Here, the persons involved in the action are you as a "victim" and your "ex Husband" as the perpetrator of the acts you are asking the court to restrain on a permanent basis.
The relationship that you and your husband had allows you to satisfy one of the statutory elements required for this type of action. The second element, abuse, must be established and the acts you allege your husband committed and continuous to commit must be included under the definition of abuse as defined in the Family Code.
Section 6203 "definition of abuse" include four different actions that could be considered abuse for purposes of a DV action.
Your husbands actions include behavior that could be enjoined pursuant to section 6320, "enjoining harassment, threats and violence", under which provision, the court may issue an ex parte order enjoining a party from molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, harassing, telephoning, destroying personal property, all acts described by you as the actions taken by your ex spouse against you even after the marriage has been dissolved for more than 2 years.
the important issue here is the recent occurrence of the alleged actions. past actions will not be considered by the judge as actions that deserve the issuance of a permanent restraining order, and when you process the form, the form ask you to start with the most recent event or act to the oldest one in order for the judge to determine the need of this type of order.
I see that there are allegations of actions that took place more than one year ago, there are actions serious in nature, but as you say, there are no witnesses and there is an issue of credibility and burden of proof that the judge must impose upon you the person who brought the action.
Yes, it is not uncommon that there are cases that deserve the issuance of a permanent restraining order and the judges have not granted and later the consequences are horrific such as the death of the moving party or her immediate relatives, which could have been prevented if the court would have issued a restraining order.
You must present evidence that points to him as the person directly or indirectly involved in the commission of the acts you describe here that amount to abuse such as damaging of personal property, attempting to run you over with his car ( not only amount to DV but is a crime that is serious in nature and can be a felony); however, that facts must be introduced and supported with relevant admissible evidence that permits the judge to reasonable believe that he is the one who committed the actions against you and that the order must be issued.
if your videos and security cameras show him actually doing acts such as keying your car or your friends cars or stealing your mail or damaging your car or your friends car tires I have a hard time believing the judge did not grant the order. If the evidence was ruled inadmissible is other thing, because introducing evidence in court requires to comply with the rules of evidence that demands the authentication of the evidence introduced at trial and other requirements.
in a case like yours, it is essential for you to seat down with an attorney who can review the evidence you have to support your claim of abuse to determine whether the evidence is relevant, credible and admissible and will satisfy your burden of proof.
You need a lawyer, your case can not continue to proceed in proper because it is obvious that there is something wrong with the evidence or the admission of that evidence that is preventing your from satisfying your burden of proof.
This response is intended as a legal advise but at no time will constitute attorney client privilege or serve the basis as a negligence malpractice action. The legal advise is based on the facts presented in the question and are based on a general application of the Law as it exists.
It is difficult to answer this question in this forum. You should make an appointment with an attorney, who can discuss this situation with you in detail and examine the evidence that you have gathered.
Legal disclaimer: The response given is not intended to create, nor does it create an ongoing duty to respond to questions. The response does not form an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to be anything other than the educated opinion of the author. It should not be relied upon as legal advice. The response given is based upon the limited facts provided by the person asking the question. To the extent additional or different facts exist, the response might possibly change. Attorney is licensed to practice law only in the State of California. Responses are based solely on California law unless stated otherwise.
You should sit down with an attorney who will be able to evaluate your case and prepare the necessary paperwork. This is a difficult question to respond to over the internet.