Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner i      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 76
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheatingPage 4 of 15    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)

Neither had any work or investment in the business. Why should they get half just because they wanted to leave?


It was probably a joint marital asset depending on the timing. That's just the law; it isn't personal.


My point was though they did nothing to help with the business the law gives them half.


I didn't do anything to help in my ex's business, but it was acquired while we were together, so legally it was half mine. My lawyer really wanted me to go down that road.


This is why I would never get married w/o a pre-nup.


Meh. We didn't have a pre-nup and we still settled things to our satisfaction. Although the business was legally half mine, I made no claim on it. For various reasons, I chose not to rock that particular boat. The main reason was that the business was about to make some significant gains, and I figured if I suddenly required him to buy out my share, he might have had to get a loan, which might affect his cash flow, which in turn might affect the expansion of the business. I really didn't want to see that happen after all those years of work. Plus, I figured he would hate me if I took away his business. I also wanted the business to be strong and intact so that our children would be able to work there, or inherit it as they grew up. It seems to be working out just that way. Our oldest (23) now works with his dad full time, and they have a great relationship. That may never have happened had I insisted on taking my legal share.
 Ed Bear
Joined: 5/19/2007
Msg: 77
view profile
History
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/4/2011 11:58:28 PM
From all the reportage I've studied, the couple were still cohabiting but divorce plans were being made when the e-mails were read by the husband. They were NOT divorced.

And the primary reason the e-mails were brought to court was the CUSTODY fight, which governs who controls a lot of the income involved. The divorce was old news by then.

The real fly in the ointment is that she HAD shown him where to find her passwords.
This may be deemed to be given permission.
ED BEAR
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 78
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 5:21:12 AM
For one thing, like the case in question, the whole thing becomes a game of who has better proof.

Uh, the reason courts exist is to make such judgments. Every criminal trial and civil action is a game of who has better proof. They even have names for that game. In a criminal matter it's called beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil matter, it's called preponderance of the evidence.

Not really, but do I think he should have been denied his share of the marital assets because of it?

Absent an aggreement to which both spouses agree, division of the marital assets is one of the basic functions the court is supposed to perform. How else do you expect the assets to be divided if the spouses aren't in agreement?
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 79
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 9:55:55 AM

I gave them a choice of no-fault with me keeping the business and all of it's assets or going to court with the adultery grounds.

I lived in a small town and they "didn't want their good names drug through the mud."

In other words you used the THREAT of washing the marital dirty linen in public to leverage against the usual split of marital assets. You did not actually obtain your divorces by citing adultery as the grounds.
As for whether or not they contributed to the business...are you saying that they lived elsewhere than under the same roof as you, that they did not care for your marital home, the children, provide you with support that enabled you to channel your energy into that business?
Division of marital assets doesn't necessarily mean that both spouses had to physically invest the same amount of time and labor in an asset. As a completely practical matter, the divorcing couple can use whatever technical clubs they can find to(figuratively speaking!) beat the other one into relinquishing their share of marital assets in general or specific assets in particular.
But I don't understand why you frequently cite old adultery statutes or provisions in state law that provide the OPTION to use a finding of fault in divorce proceedings as some sort of magic bullet that is going to completely redress the grievances of any man who experiences an unfaithful spouse. You kinda lucked out, because you had proof and because you resided in a situation where social opinion could be used as a weapon. Had you lived in a major population center, if your exes were planning to relocate or marry their adultery partners, or they just didn't give a rip about public opinion when weighed against financial benefit,you still could have had to split the marital assets.
I think some states and provinces keep clauses about adultery or physical abuse to waive or at least reduce the waiting period for finalizing a divorce, moreso than having them on the books to be used as weapons.
Cindy O
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 80
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 10:33:31 AM

In other words you used the THREAT of washing the marital dirty linen in public to leverage against the usual split of marital assets. You did not actually obtain your divorces by citing adultery as the grounds.

Division of marital assets and grounds for a divorce are two seperate issues. In states with no fault divorce, adultry and other things can still affect the division of the marital assets. Also, the threat of ``washing the marital linen'' is not a threat. It's a fact, since the divorce is a matter of public record. People settle legal disputes all the time to avoid trials.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 81
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 10:58:52 AM
Abelian, you are preaching to the choir if you are speaking to me. I was addressing some of the statements frequently made by another poster who seems to think that adultery statutes and/or the possibility of using adultery as grounds for divorce are like a magical super-weapon. Some states/provinces DO allow certain issues to be used as 'grounds', generally to access an accelerated waiting period,and it's my understanding that adultery and physical abuse are the most common.
In the information given, apparently some states do offer the option to divorce for 'cause'...in which case that cause would be a matter of public record. I KNOW that divorce itself is a matter of public record. But if the divorce is based on " irretrievable breakdown of the marriage",regardless of what allegations of who did what to who are used for division of marital assets and liabilities, what appears as public record is a divorce. Apparently in some states if the divorce is requested and granted for 'cause' or 'fault'(i.e. adultery, physical abuse,abandonment) that cause will be a matter of public record,rather than "irretrievable breakdown of the marriage" that at least used to be the language here in MI describing the no-fault divorce. To the best of my knowledge( and I admit being out of touch with recent trends in divorce here), "no fault" divorce is the only kind you can get. You are correct that issues like adultery, abuse, abandonment, (the old "grounds for divorce") are used to argue out divison of marital assets and liabilities, child custody and support,etc that get decided by the court. I'm just making an educated guess here, that in states that do permit an alternative divorce filing based on "grounds" or "fault", the "grounds" would be part of the public record, whereas a "no-fault" divorce decree would not include specific grounds or finding of fault.
And I'm well aware that negotiating settlements,and plea-bargaining in criminal matters, are probably more the norm than actual court trials are.
Cindy O
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 82
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 12:57:26 PM

In other words you used the THREAT of washing the marital dirty linen in public to leverage against the usual split of marital assets. You did not actually obtain your divorces by citing adultery as the grounds.


Correct and it worked in both cases.
However I was ready and would have went the route of adultery had they not agreed to the terms I wanted.


As for whether or not they contributed to the business...are you saying that they lived elsewhere than under the same roof as you, that they did not care for your marital home, the children, provide you with support that enabled you to channel your energy into that business?


Of course they lived with me. The first wife and I had a daughter I had custody of she was bi=polar and was not fit for motherhood or marriage.

The second one had no children prior or with me. She had a job bringing in a little under 1000.00 a week. A job she obtained because of my family name.

I asked her to pay the light bill for the house and buy grocery's. I never asked anything else of her or her bank account of which I had no access.
Although she had full access to mine and the business.

Both of my kids were old enough to take care of themselves when she came on the scene. So no her actions didn't contribute to the business at all.


Division of marital assets doesn't necessarily mean that both spouses had to physically invest the same amount of time and labor in an asset. As a completely practical matter, the divorcing couple can use whatever technical clubs they can find to(figuratively speaking!) beat the other one into relinquishing their share of marital assets in general or specific assets in particular.


Yes but in divorce the one not investing can cause the business irreparable damage by taking half the assets of said business.
Tell me is that in the best interest of the children involved?


But I don't understand why you frequently cite old adultery statutes or provisions in state law that provide the OPTION to use a finding of fault in divorce proceedings as some sort of magic bullet that is going to completely redress the grievances of any man who experiences an unfaithful spouse.


Because it has been untruthfully said on here that no-fault is the only option. I know that not to be true in some states. And in the states that only have no-fault a iron clad prenup is the best way for either gender to protect themselves.


You kinda lucked out, because you had proof and because you resided in a situation where social opinion could be used as a weapon. Had you lived in a major population center, if your exes were planning to relocate or marry their adultery partners, or they just didn't give a rip about public opinion when weighed against financial benefit,you still could have had to split the marital assets.


Yes I did luck out however if you look at jurisdictions that have adultery as a ground jury's routinely award the majority of the assets to the one cheated.


I think some states and provinces keep clauses about adultery or physical abuse to waive or at least reduce the waiting period for finalizing a divorce, moreso than having them on the books to be used as weapons.


You may be correct however in GA the state both my divorces were conducted there is only a 30 waiting period no matter the grounds.


OT......With the rate of cheating spouses at 50% for both genders I think the innocent party should have tools to help them if they think their S/O is cheating. I have no problem with what this man has done. They were still married at the time and she had showed him where her passwords were.
The law makers say this is NOT what they meant this law for and will amend it so it can't be used this way.
Sorry but this is sensationalism at its best!
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 83
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 2:32:52 PM
quote] Every criminal trial and civil action is a game of who has better proof.

You are right about that. It's a crying shame when people who have worked hard over a lengthy marriage end up losing most of their hard won assets playing a game. A lot of times, the assets are not even "lost" to the other spouse, but to the lawyers.


How else do you expect the assets to be divided if the spouses aren't in agreement?


I agree that a lot of people need to go to court to divide the assets; I just think that in court, the fact that a person cheated should not necessarily cost him/her money. I gave an example of why that should not be the case. If a person is abused, he/she can make a criminal complaint, and the abuser might to jail. If the couple then gets divorced, I don't think the abuser is generally stripped of his financial assets, so why should this happen to a cheater?


I think the innocent party should have tools to help them if they think their S/O is cheating. I have no problem with what this man has done.


Two problems here:
-the tools to which you refer may be illegal AND
-just because you catch your souse cheating, that doesn't mean you are "innocent"
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 84
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 2:59:24 PM

Two problems here:
-the tools to which you refer may be illegal


Have you missed the comments about the people that made this law saying IT WAS NEVER MEANT FOR THIS PURPOSE?
I am sure the lawmakers knew what they wanted the law to cover and they have said they will amend it to correct this misuse!


AND
-just because you catch your souse cheating, that doesn't mean you are "innocent"


AND it doesn't mean your guilty either. Why is it all or nothing with you? There are many couples that only have one cheater in them. That is what I am talking about.


If a person is abused, he/she can make a criminal complaint, and the abuser might to jail. If the couple then gets divorced, I don't think the abuser is generally stripped of his financial assets, so why should this happen to a cheater?


Bad example as they most likely owe more than they have in assets. The creditors would take what was available sell the assets they were paying on to satisfy the debt.

So yes the abuser does loose their assets if they go to jail. And yes the cheater should loose the assets of the marriage they consciously betrayed. Cheating is a choice and if someone wants to do so they should choose to divorce first!
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 85
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 3:53:19 PM
from what I googled the other day, whether or not this case is within the scope of that particular law is the subject of some controversy,and I have to say I found nothing that made it crystal clear whether or not the snooping occurred after the divorce process had begun. As I understood the material I read, the man's whole alleged basis for his hacking and snooping was because of his concerns that children might be placed in proximity to their mother being abused. I can understand that but the guy could have gotten BETTER proof by contracting with a private investigative service to have her surveilled. Traveling from her own residence to wherever she was meeting up with this abusive ex that she was having an affair with, I don't think she could have expected complete privacy and surviellance video or reports would have been an irrefutable source to support whatever it was the man was trying to accomplish...which I suspect was to have the children taken from the woman by their respective fathers.
I realize that it's a grey area with email accounts at ones' workplace, etc,and that snooping in childrens' emails might be necessary in some cases for protection of that child,but the idea that anyone who could claim some sort of reason to snoop in someone's private email, be it a spouse, the parent or sibling of an adult, a person or entity with a business or consumer relationship,certainly gives me pause!
According to some of the accounts I read, the woman stated that she did NOT give the man her password, OR leave that information in an "unprivate" location.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, for sure!
Cindy O
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 86
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 5:35:56 PM

from what I googled the other day, whether or not this case is within the scope of that particular law is the subject of some controversy,and I have to say I found nothing that made it crystal clear whether or not the snooping occurred after the divorce process had begun.


It was before....


Walker said his wife had given him her e-mail password before, and that he read her e-mails last year because he was concerned that she was exposing their young daughter to her physically abusive former husband.





According to some of the accounts I read, the woman stated that she did NOT give the man her password, OR leave that information in an "unprivate" location.


This also answers the question if she had given him her passwords.....


Leon Walker says he routinely used the computer and that she kept all of her passwords in a small book next to it. "It was a family computer," he says. "I did work on it all the time."
HARDLY PRIVATE!




It will be interesting to see how this plays out, for sure!




McMillin announced Tuesday he plans to introduce an amendment next year to clarify the state law to make sure parents and spouses cannot be charged with reading emails or other electronic communications.


Again the law written in 1979 will be amended to exclude this type of problem.

So even if convicted he will have a reason to appeal the discussion as the lawmakers NEVER intended this kind of prosecution.
Think about it in thirteen years the law has been on the books this is the first time it has been used in this way.

Something is fishy in Denmark!
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 87
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 7:03:29 PM
Two problems here:
-the tools to which you refer may be illegal

........................................................................

Have you missed the comments about the people that made this law saying IT WAS NEVER MEANT FOR THIS PURPOSE?


As society and technology evolve, so does the law. Besides, I was not only referring to the husband going into his wife's personal email, I was talking about other illegal things people do to catch cheaters. Like obtaining personal banking records, for example. You think the end justifies the means. I disagree.


I am sure the lawmakers knew what they wanted the law to cover and they have said they will amend it to correct this misuse!


The guy's lawyer would like that. It doesn't mean it is going to happen.


AND it doesn't mean your guilty either. Why is it all or nothing with you? There are many couples that only have one cheater in them. That is what I am talking about.


I wasn't talking only about cheating. I was talking about not being innocent in terms of being abusive, or being a compulsive gambler, or any number of things that are just as bad or worse than being a cheater.


If a person is abused, he/she can make a criminal complaint, and the abuser might to jail. If the couple then gets divorced, I don't think the abuser is generally stripped of his financial assets, so why should this happen to a cheater?
....................................................


Bad example as they most likely owe more than they have in assets. The creditors would take what was available sell the assets they were paying on to satisfy the debt.


You must be joking. You think that people who are abusive are more prone to debt than others?! A person with a successful business cannot also be abusive?! I really don't know where you come up with these theories.


Cheating is a choice and if someone wants to do so they should choose to divorce first!


Of course they should. In a perfect word that is what a person should do.


And yes the cheater should loose the assets of the marriage they consciously betrayed


Complete and utter nonsense. How can you possibly determine who "betrayed" the marriage vows first or more frequently? Failing to love and cherish is just as bad as cheating; it just can't be easily tracked. Unless there is an prenuptial agreement, all assets acquired during the marriage should be divided 50-50.

BTW, why such confusion over lose/loose?


Something is fishy in Denmark!


OMG! LOL...Something is rotten (in the state of ) Denmark, for God's sake! Not fishy!
 sharptack
Joined: 9/25/2010
Msg: 88
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 7:27:27 PM
I hope no woman in Michigan ever gets her hair cut there against her husbands wishes. as per Michigan law she MUST get permission from her husband to do so.

Oh for goodness sakes! Go to court! Take me to jail! Alert the media while you're at it!
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 89
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 7:42:30 PM

The guy's lawyer would like that. It doesn't mean it is going to happen.


Actually it is........
While Perricone said he presumes there must be a compelling reason he doesn't know about that might explain Cooper's decision to charge Walker under the law, State Rep. Tom McMillin isn't willing to give her that benefit of the doubt.

McMillin announced Tuesday he plans to introduce an amendment next year to clarify the state law to make sure parents and spouses cannot be charged with reading emails or other electronic communications.



I wasn't talking only about cheating. I was talking about not being innocent in terms of being abusive, or being a compulsive gambler, or any number of things that are just as bad or worse than being a cheater.


It still doesn't mean that just because one is doing any of these that the other is too!


You must be joking. You think that people who are abusive are more prone to debt than others?! A person with a successful business cannot also be abusive?! I really don't know where you come up with these theories.



When people are young and have just purchased a house a personal debt asset ratio of 80% or more is commom.


You see I have information to back my claims......You might want to check the age of abusers.......They tend to be young!



OMG! LOL...Something is rotten (in the state of ) Denmark, for God's sake! Not fishy!


Please Google the phrase as many news sites, Blog sites, and other well known organizations use it daily.

Wasn't quoting Bill.........
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 90
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/5/2011 8:49:16 PM
it still doesn't mean that just because one is doing any of these that the other is too!


Maybe not one hundred percent of the time, but most often when someone cheats, they do so because they have a shitty relationship. When TWO people have a shitty relationship, it is EXTREMELY rare that it is the fault of ONE person. I cringe if I am dating a guy who starts to tell my how his failed relationships are the fault of his exes. It smacks of self delusion.


When people are young and have just purchased a house a personal debt asset ratio of 80% or more is commom.


Fascinating. What percentage of young people with a high debt load are also abusers?
What percentage of abusers (not just PHYSICAL abusers) and compulsive gamblers and other losers , are over 30? Over 35? Over 45?
What percentage of young people with a low debt load are abusive?
What is the average age for a first divorce?

What happens to all those YOUNG abusers? Well, I would bet they grow into MIDDLE AGED ABUSERS, and then OLD ABUSERS.

Since you went and googled this stuff, would it not have made more sense to find a study that supported your actual thesis?


OMG! LOL...Something is rotten (in the state of ) Denmark, for God's sake! Not fishy!



Please Google the phrase as many news sites, Blog sites, and other well known organizations use it daily.


If they do, then they are woefully ignorant about the origin and use of this phrase OR they may have been talking about actual fish. The phrase you intended to use ( unless YOU wanted to talk about fish) has to do with a feeling (Hamlet) felt that something was just not right, or that there was some kind of mischief afoot. Hence the phrase, "There is something rotten in the state of Denmark." If you are going to quote people, try to avoid quoting the ignorant ones.
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 91
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 7:20:16 AM

Maybe not one hundred percent of the time, but most often when someone cheats, they do so because they have a shitty relationship. When TWO people have a shitty relationship, it is EXTREMELY rare that it is the fault of ONE person. I cringe if I am dating a guy who starts to tell my how his failed relationships are the fault of his exes. It smacks of self delusion.


Most of the time would require it happening over 50% of the time. Please show your research to back up your statement.


Fascinating. What percentage of young people with a high debt load are also abusers?
What percentage of abusers (not just PHYSICAL abusers) and compulsive gamblers and other losers , are over 30? Over 35? Over 45?
What percentage of young people with a low debt load are abusive?
What is the average age for a first divorce?

What happens to all those YOUNG abusers? Well, I would bet they grow into MIDDLE AGED ABUSERS, and then OLD ABUSERS.

Since you went and googled this stuff, would it not have made more sense to find a study that supported your actual thesis?


Look at most all websites that help the abused with information it is on most of them. And yes they do get older and if they continue to abuse they go to prison. So that removes them from the general public.


If they do, then they are woefully ignorant about the origin and use of this phrase OR they may have been talking about actual fish. The phrase you intended to use ( unless YOU wanted to talk about fish) has to do with a feeling (Hamlet) felt that something was just not right, or that there was some kind of mischief afoot. Hence the phrase, "There is something rotten in the state of Denmark." If you are going to quote people, try to avoid quoting the ignorant ones.


Hamlet was written in 1601 to 1602 do you think the quote could have evolved in four centuries.

As far as my intent I wrote what I intended. The more modern quote I used is commonly used to denote dirty politics.

Like the DA using a 13 year old law to charge someone in a way the law was never intended.

The law written in 1979 covered business' the lawmakers could not have foreseen that e-mail would be used in almost every home one day.

The body of lawmakers will be amending the law.
It is clear the DA is over stepping her bounds and the case will be going nowhere.
I don't attack you why do you attack me?
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 92
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 8:09:45 AM
The guy's lawyer would like that. It doesn't mean it is going to happen.


Actually it is........

While Perricone said he presumes there must be a compelling reason he doesn't know about that might explain Cooper's decision to charge Walker under the law, State Rep. Tom McMillin isn't willing to give her that benefit of the doubt.

McMillin announced Tuesday he plans to introduce an amendment next year to clarify the state law to make sure parents and spouses cannot be charged with reading emails or other electronic communications.


I've lived in Michigan all my life,my ancestors were here cutting off timber, killing the wolves, and hassling the Native Americans since pre-Revolutionary times,LOL. Now I do not always glue my ass to a chair and watch the news channels all day(believe it or not, even in NE Me Losted County,we have cable and satellite TV) but don't recall the voters approving any amendment to the state constitution allowing any member of the state legislature to simply say that something should be a certain way,and it magically becomes law., or a "clarification "of an existing law. It could take YEARS to enact. I can see that being a difficult fight and it might end up that the only thing going through would be a protection for parents who read minor children's emails. Otherwise, it's going to be the people who value a person's right to privacy against those who want another means of control in a marriage. Personally, what I'm inclined to believe is that laws will be enacted giving spouses greater privacy and autonomy-something that has already been happening for years; i.e. the passing of laws that make a married woman a full first class citizen rather than her husbands' chattel.
As for the password...which is it? Did the wife give the password,or did the husband happen to find it in a notebook? Apparently there must be sufficient evidence of "hacking", or the previous attempts to have the charges dismissed would have been successful.
With so many married couples now leading more autonomous lives, having their own employment or businesses, holding separate bank accounts, credit cards, etc,so many blended families,I'm inclined to think that there will be more of a trend towards protection of individual privacy and autonomy,rather than otherwise.
I guess we will have to wait and see if the wife's prosecuting attorney has more power than the husband's state rep.
I've only ever heard ' "something's rotten in Denmark" never any reference to a fish smell in Denmark.
Cindy O
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 93
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 8:30:09 AM

Now I do not always glue my ass to a chair and watch the news channels all day(believe it or not, even in NE Me Losted County,we have cable and satellite TV) but don't recall the voters approving any amendment to the state constitution allowing any member of the state legislature to simply say that something should be a certain way,and it magically becomes law., or a "clarification "of an existing law. It could take YEARS to enact.


Or as we saw in the recent lame duck session of congress it could be fast tracked. The defense attorney could delay the case many times to give the state rep time to work.

The FACT is the body that enacted the law has members saying it is being miss used.
Now tell me who would know better of the intent of the law..........The body that made it or some DA looking for her 15 minutes?


As for the password...which is it? Did the wife give the password,or did the husband happen to find it in a notebook?


The man says she gave it to him.....Which I tend to believe as my ex when married to me gave me hers as I gave her mine.

I quoted the book reference because you said you doubted she kept them in a unprivate place.

The book proves that was NOT the case.


Apparently there must be sufficient evidence of "hacking", or the previous attempts to have the charges dismissed would have been successful.


Or the good buddy system is in play..........In the county I moved from the public defender was nicknamed the public pretender because he would agree to anything the DA wanted.......There are underhanded thing that go on in the court systems to you know.


With so many married couples now leading more autonomous lives, having their own employment or businesses, holding separate bank accounts, credit cards, etc,so many blended families,I'm inclined to think that there will be more of a trend towards protection of individual privacy and autonomy,rather than otherwise.


Then make laws pertaining to those factors and don't try to stretch a law that does not apply.


I guess we will have to wait and see if the wife's prosecuting attorney has more power than the husband's state rep.


Yes we will and I predict a good outcome for the defendant here.


I've only ever heard ' "something's rotten in Denmark" never any reference to a fish smell in Denmark.


Well your never to old to learn.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 94
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 9:34:48 AM

body that enacted the law has members saying it is being miss used.

Yes, and there are probably members saying that responsibility for the Upper Peninsula should be assigned to Wisconsin, and that Ohio can HAVE Detroit...but it will take time to put the things those members are "saying" into the legislative processes required to create, change, or strike down a law or statute.

I still hold the position that if the man was truly driven by concern for what the woman's children might experience while in the company of their mother and her lover(who has a history of abusing the woman when he and she were a married couple),he should have used surveillance and video, tools that have been used forfreakin'ever by spouses who suspected cheating. Even if the charges are dismissed, this 'evidence' supposedly provided by the emails obtained under questionable circumstances, will have a taint that will reduce if not completely undermine their effectiveness as a weapon in the divorce proceedings. Sorry, but I think that any proposition to clarify a law so it permits and gives legality to snooping in a spouses email is going to raise questions about what else might be included as fair game for snooping. Will suspicious spouses be allowed to install spyware in a computer that's in the home? Will a spouse be permitted to arrange wiretapping or monitoring of telephone communication? If it's permissble to use spyware or keyloggers on a computer belonging to the household, (or even a spouse's personal computer if it's kept in the home) will it be fair game for a spouse or parent to use passwords/PINs to access banking information/funds that are in only the spouses' name? Will spouses be permitted to surreptitiously install tracking devices on the other one's vehicle,even if only the suspected spouse is listed on the title of the vehicle,because the vehicle is parked at the marital home,so as to use any "evidence" acquired against the other spouse.
As the trend over the past century has been towards making marriage an equal partnership, rather than the man being the owner/sponsor of the wife, I'm not sure that an amendment granting spouses leeway to snoop in each other's email and then use their findings as leverage in marital discord issues is going to have an easy and speedy passage into law.
At the end of the day, I think whatever "evidence" has been supposedly obtained by accessing the ex-wife's email will lose it's effectiveness because as it stands right now, it was technically obtained in an illegal manner,and I think that this is what the wife's attorney was going for. Whether or not this is part of some kind of "buddy network" in the legal and law-enforcement communities in that county, is just the way the cookie crumbles.
UNTIL there is actually an amendment, or the courts specifically strike down the indictment against the snooping spouse, it might be wise for contentious spouses to get dirt on each other by some means OTHER than snooping in personal email accounts.
Cindy O
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 95
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 9:42:19 AM
I don't attack you why do you attack me?


I'm not attacking you. I just disagree with almost everything you say and your rationale for saying it. You come up with random facts that prove nothing, and yet you seem to believe you have made some kind of point. I'm gonna be totally honest here, since you asked. You come across as a complete know it all, and (just as an aside) the way you write doesn't exactly make you look smart. Sorry, but you asked.


Hamlet was written in 1601 to 1602 do you think the quote could have evolved in four centuries.


Evolved? No.

Misquoted? Yes.


Look at most all websites that help the abused with information it is on most of them. And yes they do get older and if they continue to abuse they go to prison. So that removes them from the general public.


Try to focus here and address the original point I made when comparing abusers to cheaters. No need to scour websites for quotes out of context. The POINT I made is that it is unfair that a person who cheats can be denied financial assets under some state's divorce law, even though there does not seem to be the same financial penalty for those who abuse.

Yes, eventually some abusers go to jail. I have volunteered at domestic abuse shelters over the years, and let me tell you something about the division of marital assets in those divorces. It sucks! Most victims of abuse (not just physical abuse either) are barely able to get out of their marital homes with body and soul intact. They are scared to death and FREQUENTLY walk away with NOTHING. They are in fear for their lives, and they are going to go into court and ask for half the stuff? Sue for child support? Spousal support? Based on my observations in real situations ( not googling websites) it rarely happens because , more often than not, the abuser is not in jail, but sitting right there in the marital home, issuing threats and otherwise intimidating the victim. That is a much greater violation of the marriage vows than cheating, IMO.


With so many married couples now leading more autonomous lives, having their own employment or businesses, holding separate bank accounts, credit cards, etc,so many blended families,I'm inclined to think that there will be more of a trend towards protection of individual privacy and autonomy,rather than otherwise.


One hundred percent agree.
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 96
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 10:31:16 AM

I'm not attacking you. I just disagree with almost everything you say and your rationale for saying it. You come up with random facts that prove nothing, and yet you seem to believe you have made some kind of point. I'm gonna be totally honest here, since you asked. You come across as a complete know it all, and (just as an aside) the way you write doesn't exactly make you look smart. Sorry, but you asked.


Funny I have about the same opinion of your posts.

Good thing your opinion of me doesn't matter then isn't it.



Evolved? No.

Misquoted? Yes.


Hummmmm you mean that quotes and even languages don't evolve?
Well we better tell the language professors in the university's that teach the classes on that.



Try to focus here and address the original point I made when comparing abusers to cheaters. No need to scour websites for quotes out of context. The POINT I made is that it is unfair that a person who cheats can be denied financial assets under some state's divorce law, even though there does not seem to be the same financial penalty for those who abuse.


And I was showing they do lose.......Even you said some don't lose their assets to the other but to attorneys.

Besides any type of analogy is fallacious you should know that if your working on your masters.



Most victims of abuse (not just physical abuse either) are barely able to get out of their marital homes with body and soul intact. They are scared to death and FREQUENTLY walk away with NOTHING. They are in fear for their lives, and they are going to go into court and ask for half the stuff? Sue for child support? Spousal support? Based on my observations in real situations ( not googling websites) it rarely happens because , more often than not, the abuser is not in jail, but sitting right there in the marital home, issuing threats and otherwise intimidating the victim. That is a much greater violation of the marriage vows than cheating, IMO.


I'm going to shock you I agree! I think abusers should be locked away and the key lost! That doesn't change the fact that sometimes one is blindsided by their mate.
Nothing is fair in this world I did what I had to to keep my business.

My ex had taken a 100k life insurance policy out hoping I would kill myself like her first husband did. The agent told me about it about 8 months after the divorce was final.
She told the agent "It doesn't look like he is going to do what the first one did" and dropped the policy.

Does that sound fair?



One hundred percent agree.


I do too, however do it with a law made for that purpose not one that never encompassed that chance!
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 97
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 11:11:20 AM
The POINT I made is that it is unfair that a person who cheats can be denied financial assets under some state's divorce law, even though there does not seem to be the same financial penalty for those who abuse.

That's not how divorces work. Couples make an attempt to divide the marital assets in a way that is acceptable to both. If there is a dispute, then the court will make an attempt to divide what is in dispute in a fair and equitable way. Cheating isn't going to automatically take precedence over anything else unless no one says anything else. Even then, the court may not put much stock in it.

With so many married couples now leading more autonomous lives, having their own employment or businesses, holding separate bank accounts, credit cards, etc,so many blended families,I'm inclined to think that there will be more of a trend towards protection of individual privacy and autonomy,rather than otherwise.

Without a prenup, a seperate bank account doesn't protect the money from being a marital asset. Unless you spell out everything in a prenup, you might find what you thought was seperate property to be a marital asset.
 niagara45
Joined: 8/15/2010
Msg: 98
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 11:26:48 AM

Hummmmm you mean that quotes and even languages don't evolve?


I mean that you misquoted that quote. Nothing else. Anything else you say, you are making up.


And I was showing they do lose.......


Not even close. Few abusers go to jail, and I am sure even you must be aware criminal law and divorce law are different. Show me that abusers come out as losers FINANCIALLY in DIVORCE. You can't because it is not true. People who go around crying foul that they were cheated on can do so without fear, and in some places they get rewarded for it. Abuse victims are not rewarded FINANCIALLY, and many fear to even bring charges.



Even you said some don't lose their assets to the other but to attorneys.


That applies to any divorcing couple who cannot get their act together and decide that it is better to compromise than to hand over thousands (and more!) to lawyers. They let their feelings get the better of their common sense. That does not apply more so to cheaters, or abusers. It's applies to any couple.


Besides any type of analogy is fallacious you should know that if your working on your masters.


I didn't make an analogy.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 99
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 11:59:23 AM

Without a prenup, a seperate bank account doesn't protect the money from being a marital asset. Unless you spell out everything in a prenup, you might find what you thought was seperate property to be a marital asset.

That might be the case when battling it out in divorce court. But we are speaking here of hacking or snooping in computer files,or using spyware/keylogger program to obtain information that one spouse did not give the other. There are lots of spouses of both genders who keep a secret little emergency account, mostly to aid themselves in case of needing to get away from an abusive spouse- or if some wrongdoing on the part of the spouse causes the couple's joint accounts to be frozen by law enforcement or the IRS. What becomes of that money once divorce has been filed may well be the purview of the divorce court-I'm talking about a spouse having no legal barrier to keep them from hacking into the account and moving it to another bank or using some other method of moving the funds into his or her possession.
Cindy O
 OSUguy99
Joined: 4/8/2009
Msg: 100
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/6/2011 12:42:03 PM
bottom line this will be a his word vs her word case. if he sticks to his story that she gave him her password he should be golden. usually in court its a persons credibility and character that wins the case. hers is obviously lacking. i will say she does have a chance just being female. if the roles were reversed he would have no chance. i also believe when your married you are one. if one party believes the other is cheating they should have the right to investigate that by any means necessary to protect themselves.
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating