LOVE was the blinding ingredient in what was labelled as an 'intense' and 'toxic' relationship by a Gladstone man's lawyer in court.
A 56-year-old Gladstone man, who cannot be named, pleaded guilty in the Gladstone Magistrates Court to one count of the aggravated breach of a domestic violence order.
The man breached the order his former partner took out on him in 2016 for sending 4000 text messages to her between June 2016 - July 2017.
Police prosecutor Gavin Reece said none of the messages were verbally abusive and the pair often had back and forth conversations.
But it was the sheer volume of messages that carried the weight of the charge, Mr Reece said.
On July 17 at about 2pm the aggrieved went to the police station and reported the messages.
When the man was contacted by police he said he didn't realise the order meant the pair could not communicate over the phone.
Defence lawyer Stacey O'Gorman said while the relationship had since ended, at the time her client had closed his eyes to the conditions of the relationship.
"He thought he had found the woman of his dreams ... he was in love," she said.
"My client has told me it was a very intense relationship, (it was) toxic and unhealthy.
"Unfortunately, these two adults, through wilful ignorance, didn't appreciate the bounds of a non-contact court order."
Ms O'Gorman said the aggrieved still tried to contact her client but was turning over a new leaf and choosing to ignore the contact.
"This relationship was the first he had after a 38-year marriage."
She said her client was extremely embarrassed over the offending and had sought counselling to move past it.
She also asked that the magistrate take into account that her client worked in an office with a zero tolerance for domestic violence.
His employers might take a "dim view" of the offence if a conviction was recorded, Ms O'Gorman said.
However, Gladstone Magistrate Melanie Ho wasn't persuaded by the lawyer's argument and recorded a conviction against the man, given he had one prior of like offending.
She also imposed a $1000 fine.