In any event, he never said there was a 209A. It's just as likely that there is a Stay-Away/No Contact order as a condition of bail. That's my guess based on the temporary order mentioned in the original post.
I've had more than enough clients who called the police to try to defuse a situation. That's what the police department used to recommend. The police end up arresting someone "because if we show up, someone's getting arrested". Unless the "victim" is in court to say she doesn't want it, the judge frequently issues a stay-away/no contact order.
Hopefully, this is the case with Eddie.
If they came and stole his guns how is this functionally different than a 209A? I've never heard of a 30 day stay away, but I always thought the usual deal was a temp DV RO would get mutated into a long term one, but they have the same net effect. So you are suggesting if the judge issued it "as a matter of course" it will auto expire and he would get his rights back by default?