|
|
|
|
|
| | For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheatingPage 14 of 15 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) |
I realize that, but I was under the impression that all of those things were addressed by an appellate court after the verdict...
A common misconception. Minnesota for instance (who, like most states, models her rules after the federal rules), has a non-exhaustive list of ten types of appealable judgments and orders. Rule 103.3 (a-j), some of which are very broad and open to interpretation.
I would have assumed the appellate court in a case likethis woul normally have said, wait for the appeal until after the trial and deferred to to trial judge to run the trial as the trial judge saw fit.
I’m not sure on what basis the appellate court accepted the interim appeal so I can’t fully address the subject. You’re correct to assume most appeals are made post-trial. Some aren’t. Again I think that the fact the appeal was made and heard says a lot about the quality of Leon’s representation. In fairness, this isn’t a speeding ticket and it’s a new twist on the interpretation of the law so he’s prudent to use the best counsel he can afford.
Judges seem to be pretty defensive when it comes to aanyone questioning how they run their courtrooms.
Nobody likes to be second guessed, but if you accepted the position of trial judge I suppose you’d better expect it.
In fact, I think a lot of defendants take plea deals precisely because they get offered something that even when innocent beats the prospect of gambling on what could happen if they went to trial. It's easy to get a person who hasn't done anything to plead to a reduced charge that involves little or no jail time if the alternative is facing a jury that might be persuaded to convict and impose the maximum sentence they can. Plead to misdemeanor and walk or go to trial for a felony that could land a year or more in jail? Easy choice for a defendant with no money. Plead out and go back to work in the morning.
Absolutely. It happens way too often. Way too often. And after he pays his fine and does his time the poor sod has to deal with all of the collateral consequences he didn’t see coming: drivers license suspension or revocation, enhanced penalties, immigration issues, loss of voting rights, gun privileges, student loans, fed housing, international travel privileges, sex offender registry, DNA registry, employability, social stigma and a bucket load of misery he didn’t even know existed. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 10:18:39 AM | If you have no problems Snooping....don't expect the relationship to last very long..!!
My last one broke-off 3 times...!!!
I had to put passwords on my and her desktops...just to keep her out of my Browsing History!
She didn't like THAT very much, either...
Okay...I'm alone, now...but healthier and happier for it, too..!! | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 10:31:30 AM | So, what you are saying is that since it's his wifes( and therefore in theory his)-its OK for him to hack her email, hack a police database. Even though the information he accessed/attempted to access was internet content-albeit private internet content.
If you can't figure out that a couple is married until the judge signs the divorce papers
I GET that.
So why aren't people who date other persons before their divorce is final, being prosecuted for adultery-is that the point you are attempting to make? By the token of joint ownership (if THAT'S the point you are trying to make), either person in a marriage undergoing divorce, could clean out a bank account, drive away the spouse's automobile,take their belongings and sell them/give them away, or destroy them? What distinction is it exactly you are trying to make?
Really, what has my interest is how the defense presented this matter to the media-spinning it to be about "cheating"...when "cheating"( yeah yeah, the divorce wasn't final so technically, seeing someone else IS cheating) really ISN'T the issue.
However, I believe their still may be some old adultery/alienation laws on the books here in MI-so if this was REALLY about the wife 'cheating'-seems like she too would be prosecuted. So either "cheating" is not directly involved, or there is a bias in Oakland County because this woman is not also being prosecuted for HER crime-adultery.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:22:12 PM | So, what you are saying is that since it's his wifes( and therefore in theory his)-its OK for him to hack her email,
If the computer he's being prosecuted for misusing is his, he can't really not have th authorization to access anything on it. He is apparently NOT being prosecuted for accessing the gmail mail servers, which would be the only computer he could have misused by accessing his wife's email. The business about being prosecuted for reading his wife's email is not exactly what he's being prosecuted for doing. He's being being prosecuted for obtaining the passwords from his wife's computer. Since he isn't divorced and there is nothing that indicates it's not a marital asset for some reason, , I asssume that's a marital asset he's entitled to use however he likes. Has he committed a felony if he reboots it, too?
The CLEMIS charge is a different thing altogether. He claims that his only action with respectto accessing CLEMIS was to ask someone he knew a few questions so he could file an FOIA requst, which anyone is entitled to do. The prosecutor has said, there's more to it than that, but so far hasn't said anything that would give anyone any clue as to what that might be. Proseutors file charges they can't prove all they time. It's easy to drop them or work them into a plea bargain if filing them helps pressure a defendant into pleading out. In this case, the defendant didn't roll over.
So why aren't people who date other persons before their divorce is final, being prosecuted for adultery
For the same reason people who have affairs and aren't even planning to get divorced aren't prosecuted. If there actually is still an enforceable statute on the books, the prosecutor chooses to not prosecute, most likely because if he did and got a conviction, an appellate court woud eventually overturn it. Those statutes are still on the books only because the legislature would need to act to remove them. (If I were a legislator, I might think twice before initiating any action to remove such a statute, since there's always the consrvative right to remind everyone at election time of moral bankruptcy for it. It may never be enforced, but rationality is not a factor in elections beyond the strategy to get re-elected.)
-is that the point you are attempting to make?
You mean about the fact that I was dating my fiancee while she was seperated? If so, no. I was just pointing out that sainthood is not my destiny, so you included me by mistake when you noted that I probably wouldn't date someone who was still legally married. In fact, the reason she WAS still legally married was that despite having had nothing to do with her ex for over 2 years and not having even seen him for a year, being legally married provided her with health benefits until she got her own health insurance. The fact that she was ``in the process of getting a divorce'' didn't take that away. Without that, she'd have been paying off a 40k sugery bill for fibroid surgery and a partial hysterectomy, so my peference was stay married and keep the insurance until your employer's is in effect, just in case. They may have been divorced as far as she was concerned, but as far as the law was concerned, they were legally married. (There's no legal seperatio in Texas.)
However, I believe their still may be some old adultery/alienation laws on the books here in MI-so if this was REALLY about the wife 'cheating'-seems like she too would be prosecuted.
Well, I suppose in principle, she ought to be, but in practice it would be pointless, ecept perhaps to get the law off the books as a result when the coviction (if that occured) was overturned. It may be non-enforceable for that reason already. If so, I imagine there should be a note to that effect in the statute somewhere.
Alo, what laws are vigorously enforced and which are really low priorities depends a lot on whether or not elections are coming up. You'll see that prostitution gets a lot more attention around election time, for example. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:52:58 PM | Abelian
Just to clarify-
I had no thought of anything about you and your fiancee in relation to this topic.
I understand that divorces often are not finalized quickly, for reasons such as you outlined.
Now, do we actually KNOW for sure whether the guy accessed copies of the emails that were stored in his stbx-wifes' hard drive,or did he obtain them from the gmail servers.
Yes, technically, they may still be married, and therefore he has the right to use the stbx-wifes computer for any purpose he wishes...and since they are still married and everything is marital assets-the stbx-wife should be able to take money out of bank accounts, and either one of them could help themselves to the use of any vehicles they own-even if it's in the parking lot of the stbxs' workplace, correct?
I'm simply trying to point out that it might be sort of an exercise in hair-splitting to claim that the stbx-hubby had every right to use a "marital asset" computer to access his stbx-wifes' stored emails(apparently also considered a marital asset?) It certainly seems like there have to be some boundaries, even within "marital property/marital assets",when a divorce is in process. Otherwise it seems like the 2 people could be emptying bank accounts, using each others' vehicles, etc under the umbrella of " not yet divorced therefore these things are marital assets".
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 1:55:11 PM | Yes, technically, they may still be married, and therefore he has the right to use the stbx-wifes computer for any purpose he wishes...and since they are still married and everything is marital assets-the stbx-wife should be able to take money out of bank accounts, and either one of them could help themselves to the use of any vehicles they own-even if it's in the parking lot of the stbxs' workplace, correct?
Probably, but I'm not sure about accessing accounts and signature cards. What is true is that even if a wife couldn't access a husband's bank accounts by virtue of not being on the signature card, in a divorce, that account is not neccesarily considered seperate property. That doesn't get decided until the lawyers get done and the judge signs off on it.
Otherwise it seems like the 2 people could be emptying bank accounts, using each others' vehicles, etc under the umbrella of " not yet divorced therefore these things are marital assets".
The short answer is that emptying bank accounts before you get to court doesn't mean you got away with the money. Whether r not the money you took is still a marital asset and that you've only tried to hide it or you spent it is what the court decides after the lawyers argue about it.
If there's money involved, the lawyers will try to find it. Then they'll argue about and the judge will decide what is a marital asset and what isn't. If you squireled away more than your share of what the court decided was a marital asset, you won't be getting a share of what's left. You could be very well stuck owing money.
My dad did family law for 40 years and I asked about that once. He said a lot of people try to do that sort of thing, Attorneys are there to make sure they don't get away with it. A contested divorce with a lot of money involved is a mess to sort out if the parties are going to be fighting over the assets. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 7:39:12 PM | Abelian
I realize that emptying a bank account/hiding assets( or attempting to do so) is probably going to catch up to whichever stbx-spouse tries to do that. I simply wanted to point out that claiming "marital property " entitled him to use his stbx-wifes' computer, seems like a pretty thin defense to me. That's not exactly the same as a bank account or a big ticket item. Most rational divorcing couples that I've ever known( the key word there being rational) did have some degree of respect for items that their spouse considered to be personal items...computers, cameras, sporting /recreational items, crackberry or cell phone,etc...even though technically those might be considered marital property and both spouses entitled to have the use of it.
The fact that throughout the various narratives we've been exposed to regarding this issue, the computer is referred to as "her computer". If it had been a household/family computer, the "he had every right to use the computer it was marital property" argument might have more weight. And do we know for sure that he accessed email STORED on that particular computers' hard drive-or did he actually access her email account on the gmail servers?
It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Perhaps the Oakland County judicial system is considering that this has potential to be a precedent-setter, and just wants to be ultra-careful that all the "i "s are dotted and the "t"s are crossed before the convene a trial that may(thanks to manipulation of the media-or media using sensationalistic tactics to increase their reader/viewer base) actually SEEM to be about prosecuting someone for reading their spouses' email.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 8:31:06 PM | If you have nothing to hide then there is no reason for a significant other not to be able to view what is going on in your life...both of my husbands had access to everything I did ...there was just no reason to snoop to start with.
I can understand why someone who is involved with someone that starts to hide thing would feel threatened and then might end up snooping. With the different STD in some ways they could be protecting themselves, could be a financial issue involved also.
it all ends up as trust issues; if you arent doing anything wrong you wont care ...if you are then you will. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/28/2011 9:16:49 PM | Ahh- I rest my case...Giggles 1000 has proved my point.
Giggles- not picking on you!-but this case is NOT about snooping and it's not about snooping to catch someone cheating. The couple involved were in process of divorce-the "snooping" was done to obtain information that a 3rd party could use against the woman( take custody of her eldest child).
I won't go into all the details-read the thread, check out the links to news articles.
This man and this woman were NO LONGER 'significant others'.
Essentially-for whatever motivation he had,the stbx-husband was accessing her email someone else to use against her in a child custody matter. It had nothing to do with cheating or STDS.
Technically, yes the woman was "doing something wrong"-she was dating another man before the divorce was final. I got no sense whatsoever that she was concealing that or lying about it-the issue was having her children present when she was spending time with this other guy( actually another ex-husband,lol).
Despite the attempts by the defense-and the media, to make this be about snooping in email to catch a cheating spouse-that is not what its' about.
I do not disagree with you about trust issues and having nothing to hide- but this was no longer anything but a marriage in process of official dissolution. It was way beyond trust/having nothing to hide.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 7:11:03 AM |
The fact that throughout the various narratives we've been exposed to regarding this issue, the computer is referred to as "her computer". If it had been a household/family computer, the "he had every right to use the computer it was marital property" argument might have more weight.
The FACT is it is a shared computer if you had bothered to read the OP it states......
Leon Walker, 33, who says he learned of his wife's affair by reading her e-mail on their computer, faces trial on felony computer misuse charges.
Notice the statement "reading her e-mail on THEIR computer"
That settles the question of was it just hers or marital property.
He had full rights to be on the computer.
Perhaps the Oakland County judicial system is considering that this has potential to be a precedent-setter, and just wants to be ultra-careful that all the "i "s are dotted and the "t"s are crossed before the convene a trial that may(thanks to manipulation of the media-or media using sensationalistic tactics to increase their reader/viewer base) actually SEEM to be about prosecuting someone for reading their spouses' email.
Cindy O
Or perhaps the appellate court sees no reason to go to trial and thus their request from the trial judge.
From the judges comments it seems to be bothering the judge that the appellate court is requiring this.
Maybe the appellate court is trying to keep the chance of a lawsuit against the county/state from happening seeing as the legislation branch has said that the law was never meant to be used in this way and they are amending it to say so.
Or maybe the appellate court knows how slippery this slope is and wants to stay off of it.
Bottom line to go forward the judge will have to submit the answers the appellate court has asked. And if the appellate court is not satisfied with the answers they can keep the case from going to trial. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 7:51:29 AM | The whole legal framework is in a state of flux and is being defined rather randomly... and yes this prosecutor is trying to get his name in case law as a career stepping stone for sure.... but the whole issue is about where the data is located.... if the email(data) is resident on the local PC simple property rights and joint ownership apply... if the data(email) resides offsite in the gmail computers... then there is a privacy issue.... the work around is to use a keylogger snooper program on the local pc... then all keystrokes are the intellectual property of the originating device and it sidesteps ownership and location issues of data.... this also bumps into civil rights issues as well where the government might snoop your offsite accounts without a warrant or probable cause..... the prosecutor is probably trying to get this global issue as well on the books so he will make a name for him/herself.... and then what also applies is where the actual resident server is located off/onshore
BTW only US mail has assigned privacy rights but not UPS, Fedex, email, junk mail... etc
Abe please comment on my post.... your insights are quite stellar on most topics... and I really value your thoughts | |
|
| |
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 8:09:42 AM | I simply wanted to point out that claiming "marital property " entitled him to use his stbx-wifes' computer, seems like a pretty thin defense to me.
Why? They're married. It's the same as looking through a chest of drawers she keeps her stuff in. It's still in the house and regardless of what you think about it, looking through her things isn't illegal or a misuse of a chest of drawers. It doesn't even need to be justified.
Most rational divorcing couples that I've ever known( the key word there being rational) did have some degree of respect...
What people agree to do amicably has nothing to do with what they could do legally. My dad practiced family law for 40 years and I assure you, there are a lot of couples who do crazy things. He had a guy pull a gun on him for representing the guy's wife. The computer issue here is nothing.
The fact that throughout the various narratives we've been exposed to regarding this issue, the computer is referred to as "her computer".
Since they weren't divorced and a judge hasn't awarded her the computer in a settlement, it doesn't matter how it's referred to in the media. What matters is who the legal owner is and I imagine that ,legally, it's a marital asset. I can't see how it could not be, since that hadn't been argued and decided through the divorce.
And do we know for sure that he accessed email STORED on that particular computers' hard drive-or did he actually access her email account on the gmail servers?
It really doesn't matter, because if he accessed the gmail servers without authorization, that would be a slam dunk if there was a case there. Having a password to a computer (or account on a computer) doesn't imply authorization to access it. Those cases are prosecuted all the time and won with no difficulty or controversy. If there was a case there, the prosecutor would have jumped on it. In that case, the charge would really be about reading his wife's email in a way that's intuitively obvious.
Gmail owns the gmail servers, so it would be easy to show that gmail didn't authorize access if that was a real question. Instead, the prosecutor is attempting to use a staute in a way the statute wasn't meant to be used because the actual issue of reading his wife's email was a non-starter. If your spouse looks through a drawer you keep things in and the drawer is in the dwelling in which you both reside, is that illegal? Is it illegal if the drawer is locked? How is that different from a computer that is in a dwelling in which you both reside? (I'm assuming the computer isn't owned by an employer or someone for whom explicit authorization is necessary. If she worked for the department of defense and her husband accessed a department of defense computer, for example, the case would be clear cut, even if he knew the passwords.) That isn't the case here. His wife uses a laptop that is hers only through some understanding they had, not because it's hers in any legal sense.
Perhaps the Oakland County judicial system is considering that this has potential to be a precedent-setter,
That has a way of backfiring if a precedent gets set and the ramifications aren't clear until later. No two cases are the same, so the precedent applies to any case that a lawyer can analogize it to and support with a convincing argument. That's what they get paid to do. If you want to see the epitome of that art, read the majority and dissenting opinion for almost any 5-4 Supreme Court ruling.
| |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:58:21 PM | The FACT is it is a shared computer if you had bothered to read the OP it states......
But as I recall it, some of the outside sources I looked at did refer to it as "her" computer. Granted, due to the divorce not being finalized and signed off on at the time of the incident-neither the man or the woman had any separate property.While most married couples do have some respect for certain boundaries, until the divorce is granted, it is in fact THEIR wallet, THEIR purse, THEIR dressers and THEIR dresser drawers. I stand corrected, I should not expect that any boundaries be set-or observed-in a marriage,because as a matter of law, everything is THEIR property, not his or hers. As for the matter of the email-is THAT also both their property? Apparently there was some doubt about how he obtained it-which is why he is charged with a crime.
reading her e-mail is her email marital property too-even if he had to access her account on the gmail servers? If a wife or husband locks an item of" marital propery" in a drawer at someone else's home, is it legal for the other spouse to enter that home uninvited and break into the drawer to access that marital property?
Before someone tells me to "don't be ridiculous"
My dad practiced family law for 40 years and I assure you, there are a lot of couples who do crazy things. He had a guy pull a gun on him for representing the guy's wife. The computer issue here is nothing. so yeah, one spouse might decide that "marital property" permitted him or her to access someone elses' premises to obtain that marital property. Who is "in the wrong" in that scenario? I'm talking about something on the order of a small item that someone could easily consider as his or her own belonging-with some monetary value but not on the magnitude of say, a car, cash money,a boat...you get the picture.Who is in the wrong?
He had full rights to be on the computer.
but did he have the right to access HER email? Especially if he accessed it on gmails' server? If you use a computer you have "full rights to be on", to steal information, run a scam, defraud someone, access sensitive information,that is a crime, even to the level of a felony.
Or perhaps...itseems...Maybe ...or maybe...
Its' all just speculation on everybody's part right now... a good topic for debate on several aspects.
My personal opinion is that it could go either way.
I was looking more at the "trying the case in the media" and the "spin" thing that has so many people believing that this is about a husband snooping in his wifes' email to find out if she was cheating-instead what it really is, a divorcing couples' infighting, using the children as pawns.
and yes this prosecutor is trying to get his name in case law as a career stepping stone for sure....
When this first came to everyone's attention, it was a female prosecutor-and of course some made that out to be about women sticking up for each other even when they are in the wrong.
I'm glad to see that this has apparently been now passed on to a male prosecutor. I'd like to have been a fly on the wall or the mouse in the corner to know whats' behind THAT.
the work around is to use a keylogger snooper program on the local pc... And no one will say this is wrong to do on a private(household) computer, because it helps keep track of what children are doing on the internet.
That has a way of backfiring if a precedent gets set and the ramifications aren't clear until later.
which would be exactly why they are proceeding with utmost caution, IMO.
As I said, my interest was more on the defense strategy/journalistic portrayal of the matter-to see how that works out.
Note the title of this thread. The OP thinks the case is about "snooping to find out if their partner is cheating". The man wasn't 'snooping" to find out about "cheating"-the marriage was pretty much dead, they just weren't done burying it-and the snooping was done in aid of providing a 3rd party with information. It is what I would characterize as divorce issue infighting, using the children as weapons. I hate when people do that-a lefotover from days when I worked in a community service organization assisting troubled families, the elderly, the disadvantaged,etc.
I saw some kids that were pretty screwed up from being used as pawns in the parent's divorce battles. I guess I'd be for just about nything that put a stop to that horsesh*t.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 3:09:28 PM |
Who is "in the wrong" in that scenario? I'm talking about something on the order of a small item that someone could easily consider as his or her own belonging-with some monetary value but not on the magnitude of say, a car, cash money,a boat...you get the picture.Who is in the wrong?
I don't think you're getting it. If you pawned your husband's watch, could you be prosecuted for felony theft?
The man wasn't 'snooping" to find out about "cheating"-the marriage was pretty much dead, t
That isn't necessarily true either. If you ask a divorce lawyer he/she will tell you to NOT date anyone until the divorce is final. It CAN affect the settlement, so it's perfectly reasonable to go look for that anytime before the divorce is final. Spouses and their attorneys do that ALL the time. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 3:25:17 PM |
If you ask a divorce lawyer he/she will tell you to NOT date anyone until the divorce is final
Yet people do it all the time. They leave their spouse and move in with the new interest.
Not saying that makes it right...just an observation. And, unless it has since been done away with, I believe there still may be some laws on the MI books regarding adultery.
Hell, here in MI we prosecute capsized, wet, mad canoeists for swearing in front of women and children.
I think the observation could be made, from witnessing my, and another poster from another penisular state, that people who live on peninsulas can be difficult and contrary.
Oh-and the watch thing...suppose my husband knew I might do such a thing, so he locked his watch in a desk drawer at the home of a friend. Could I be proscuted for an unauthorized/unlawful entrance into that friends home and breaking into that drawer to obtain that marital property-IT IS marital property,after all. Does the fact that it is stored elsewhere-where I do not have any right or authorization to go-fade in the face of it being marital property?
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 4:07:05 PM | Yet people do it all the time.
Lawyers can only advise clients to do what's in their client's best interests. They have no power to enforce it.
Hell, here in MI we prosecute capsized, wet, mad canoeists for swearing in front of women and children.
That's a seperate topic.
Oh-and the watch thing...suppose my husband knew I might do such a thing, so he locked his watch in a desk drawer at the home of a friend. Could I be proscuted for an unauthorized/unlawful entrance into that friends home and breaking into that drawer to obtain that marital property-IT IS marital property,after all.
Be serious. Breaking into someone else's residence is, at the very least, breaking and entering.
Does the fact that it is stored elsewhere-where I do not have any right or authorization to go-fade in the face of it being marital property?
No. It still is marital property. You are entitled to go through any legal means to obtain it. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 4:40:29 PM |
Does the fact that it is stored elsewhere-where I do not have any right or authorization to go-fade in the face of it being marital property?
No. It still is marital property. You are entitled to go through any legal means to obtain it.
At the time of my divorce I had sent some diamonds to a jeweler to be reset as a surprise gift to her because we were having issues... trying to stupidly buy her affections.... bad idea... but the jeweler got the idea (from my own words) that a divorce /separation was in the works but not yet filed and attempted to place them in "safe storage" until released by court order while assessing hefty "management fees".... I asserted my joint property rights and threatened suit for unlawful conversion of property to the jeweler to get them back in my possession and they later became a bargaining chip in the settlement equity process... good thing I knew enough of my rights... | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 6/29/2011 5:45:21 PM | I mentioned the prosecution of the "cursing canoeist" to indicate-and illustrate- that here in MI we do have some odd and outdated/irrelevant laws on the books, OR ways of interpreting them. I was making a point about Michigan law-which I believe IS related to the topic here, since it is happening in Michigan. Is that enough clarification?
As far as the watch being in someone else's house-and having to use LEGAL means to get it-could we consider this womans' email to be on non-marital premises( the gmail server),did the accused use "legal means" to obtain it? IS email "marital property"?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40820892/ns/technology_and_science-security
Man faces charges for reading wife's e-mail
Husband used his wife's password to access her Gmail inbox
That is from the OT. Of course-what is meant by GMail inbox? IF she uses an email access program that is part of the computers' installed software-does that mean that the email is physically residing in the hard drive of this marital property computer,so that it is (as some claim) legal for the stbx-husband to read it? If he accessed it directly via the Gmail log-in page( on the web)-would that be considered illegal access since he and the stbx-wife don't own Gmail server?
I think it is clear that this is-to say the least-a complex matter.
And despite the trend to try and make understanding of the laws of the land extremely DIFFICULT-requiring the assistance of a person who charges a few hundred bucks an hour. I always understood that one of the things that the founding fathers were trying to achieve,was that the laws and their administration would not be incredibly difficult to understand by a reasonable man(person, if you prefer the PC version).
Yes, I know, the Founding Fathers did not foresee computers,the internet,automatic weapons,50% divorce rate,etc. etc. More complex environments require more complex laws-I'm not arguing that point at all.
I just think it will be interesting to see how this all shakes out.
And the most recent message posted by gentleplus, might serve to illustrate how willing some persons or entities may be to take advantage of complexities for their own gain or benefit.
Yes, I mean for that statement to be as broadly interpreted as anyones' little heart desires.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/27/2011 1:51:40 AM | Latest news I've seen on this is The Michigan Court of Appeals has halted the case while it considers a motion to dismiss and the charges of him "attempting" to "hack" the police computer database have been dropped. He didn't attempt to get into the database. He simply asked questions about it in an open manner and in a knee jerk reaction the prosecutor decided to slap a charge on him. Seems the prosecutor is the arsehole in the whole case.
As I find out more I'll post more but it's looking pretty dang good that he is going to walk on this. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/27/2011 12:11:34 PM | What about when someone hires a PI to follow their spouse around? Isn't that an invasion of privacy? No laws against that I am aware of.
I didn't hire someone. I asked my husband's GF's ex-husband (that's a mouthful) to take some pictures. He was a cop and had access that I didn't have. He did, he gave them to me and I handed them to my husband. He still tried the "It isn't what it looks like...." lingo. Ummmm ~ I may not be all that bright, but I know a BJ in a car when I see one in print.  Needless to say? I bought her ex a drink, sent the husband to her house, sent her flowers and lived happily ever after. Sometimes what we "know" and what we "KNOW" can surely set us free. As for snooping? I don't bother. I'm not married, no one truly owes me anything more than honesty the best they can muster and if it's not working ~ well, we both have the option to walk away. I learned over the years that there really are some things I'd just rather not know, because I likely already KNOW. And when I KNOW? I'm not sticking around long, no need for visuals or verifications at that point. At least not for me. JMO  | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/28/2011 11:33:17 AM | To the original poster: What could possibly be the point of snooping around for clues that your partner has been cheating? If you are that suspicious of your partner and your snooping is not the result of a paranoid personality, you obviously don't trust your partner. Doesn't that tell you everything you need to know?
Dishonesty reveals itself sooner or later whether you are a snoop or not. While I was being a loving faithful wife, raising children and working a career, my ex decided he needed an affair. I knew nothing about it. Ten years later, I asked for a divorce based on issues not connected to unfaithfulness. Eventually, he revealed the affair, saying he needed to unburden himself. It was immaterial that he cheated because we were headed for divorce anyway. By cheating he lived with guilt for years, and he will live the rest of his life knowing he lied to the woman he loved, married and with whom he created a family. That speaks more about who he is as a person not about who I am or our marriage. | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/28/2011 12:59:25 PM |
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating...
Might be singing a different tune depending on the outcome of this case:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40820892/ns/technology_and_science-security
Man faces charges for reading wife's e-mail
Husband used his wife's password to access her Gmail inbox
Leon Walker, 33, who says he learned of his wife's affair by reading her e-mail on their computer, faces trial on felony computer misuse charges.
ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich. — A Michigan man who says he learned of his wife's affair by reading her e-mail on their computer faces trial Feb. 7 on felony computer misuse charges.
Thirty-three-year-old Leon Walker used his wife's password to get into her Gmail account. Clara Walker filed for a divorce, which was granted this month.
Leon Walker tells The Oakland Press of Pontiac he was trying to protect the couple's children from neglect and calls the case a "miscarriage of justice."
Oakland County Assistant Prosecutor Sydney Turner says the charge is justified.
Privacy law writer Frederick Lane tells the Detroit Free Press the law typically is used to prosecute identity theft and stealing trade secrets. He says he questions if a wife can expect privacy on a computer she shares with her husband.
I suggest that everyone newly come to this topic read the link offered in the OT and I believe there have been subsequent posts offering links to stories that add more information.
In my opinion, this story came about for reasons other than pure journalistic reporting of the news.
As for snooping in someone else's email, their wallet, their cell phone, I don't see myself doing that unless it was in aid of preventing harm done by a REAL crime.
I am not particularly in favor of 'snooping' in a marital or family situation, but neither do I support it being made into an actionable offense...the occasions where "snooping "is "justified" are rare, but they do exist.
Also, let me make it clear that my personal opinions about this case do NOT reflect that I am taking the wifes' side,the husbands' side or that anyone is being oppressed or wronged.
My personal opinion is that the reporter(s) and editors(s) who allowed themselves-IN MY OPINION-to become a tool of the defendant and his represention, did the PUBLIC a disservice by using misleading headlines/lead captions.
I realize that this opinion is not directly about snooping or prosecuting a snoop-but to speak to the question raised by the distorted information, and give my personal answer, I would not "snoop" in a spouse,SOs, friends or relatives' email except in very limited,narrow and VERY dire circumstances-I'm talking about REAL crime/REAL danger.
To snoop on suspicion of "cheating"? No, I wouldn't. So I don't guess I'll ever go to jail for THAT particular transgression.
Cindy O | |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/28/2011 4:31:21 PM | The volume of females that have no problem with privacy being violated in marriage is yet more justification for never getting married. Marriage does not overwrite privacy. National security is not suppose to either, but of course the weak minded and cowardly authoritarians will say otherwise.
I know in my own case I had a friend who snooped in my emails using a key logger on her computer. She thought I was guilty of something, when it turned out it was her conniving son and his little friend that were trying to break us up. We broke up two weeks later and I never spoke to her again, largely over what she did, but also over her attitude about how I was a man and no man could be trusted.
As other posters said, privacy is paramount. It is a law and a founding social principle for a reason. If the other person lacks that much trust, or if the violation of privacy is perfectly allowed to them (because they are a woman and their target is a man), then they have no business in a relationship in the first place. Don't get me started on how state sanctioned snooping is totally immoral.
Too many humans simple lack respect for their fellow human beings. Those people deserve neither respect nor compassion.
| |
|
| For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 8/28/2011 5:19:44 PM | sensualseekerns, don't think only women snoop.
My ex had a scary looking PI follow me which caused me to think I was being stalked until I realized what was going on. Ironically, it wasn't me cheating it was my ex. Because I'd asked for a divorce (based on other things, I didn't know about his cheating), he was certain I must be having an affair.
Whether it's a PI on your tail or hacking your email account (he did that too), it is wrong. And that sort of behaviour tells you it's time to end the relationship. Honest people neither condone nor are threatened by snoops, they leave them.
I know everyone's situation is different, but for those gathering information for a divorce case consider that you could loose more than you gain, beyond illegally obtaining evidence and violating privacy laws. I gladly paid for a simple non-contested divorce to ensure no lingering ties to my ex. I hung on to a job I hated so I could carry the house and kids. As I watch friends deal with their ex partners in court over alimony and financial issues years after the fact, I'm convinced it was the best thing I ever did. Forget revenge, it emotionally imprisons you. | |
|
|
|
|
Page
14
of
15 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
|
|
Home
login 
