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
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 176
view profile
History
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheatingPage 8 of 15    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)

Then you probably have a malpractice lawsuit - which is not the same thing as a sanction.


You really don't want either one. Just filing a complaint about a lawyer with the State Bar, whether there's anything to it or not, may very well increase the cost of their malpractice insurance. You've got to be pretty dumb to start acting as someone's lawyer, without any formal agreement, unless it's a longtime friend you trust completely.

And if you know someone is manipulative, makes up the truth as they go, etc., you'd have to be crazy to give them anything that could possibly be construed as legal advice. If anything goes south, you know a person like that is going to lie to save themselves, and try to put the blame on you.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 177
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 12:19:45 PM

Either I’m not reading you right or you meant to say something a little different. Are you saying that if you don’t get what you want the way you want it then you resort to courtroom tactics? And, if that is what you meant, what are “courtroom tactics” and how do you decide what is appropriate?

I'm saying that I make every effort to what I consider the ``right thing,'' which I presume could only be construed negatively by someone whose idea of what the ``right thing'' was differed from mine. I'm willing to leave any judgment of how fair I am to those who know me well enough to have a basis for judgment. I assume that is what you mean, since I can't think of any way to make that objective and compare notes. On the other hand, once I think I've bent over backwards and someone is taking advantage of that, all bets are off. I'll play by whatever rules I'm stuck with and make life difficult. I haven't had to do that very often, but I have a real antipathy for people who try to bullshit me, especially after I clue them in that I know I'm being bullshitted. Some people don't know when to quit, e.g., the previously mentioned business partner.


And, if that is what you meant, what are “courtroom tactics” and how do you decide what is appropriate?

Preferably with advice from an attorney, but if I have to make a decision, I'll make it and let the chips fall where they may.


Yes I think we have identified the issues as ‘was there authorization to access’ and ‘what constitutes property under the statute’.

We disagree on that, but because of:

I’m not sure where you’re going with the “special knowledge” element. I did not see that language in the statute.

It's not clear that what you've identified is what is in the charges. The DA argued that because he has an IT job, he used his ``special knowledge'' to accomplish something the average person could not, i.e., the ``hacking her account.'' (That seems to be a reason to make something an offense or escalate charges for computer crimes, in general.) Nothing related to accessing the gmail servers with a password requires any special knowledge or hacking. That only leaves hacking the shared computer, which can't possibly be illegal. (I'd also argue that it doesn't require much in the way of special knowledge to hack your own computer, but I'm computer literate even though I don't work in the field, so my idea of what the average person could easily know, might be skewed.)
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 178
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 12:48:15 PM
Apart from the invasion of privacy (he was able to read my private emails and I saw how some with a man I dated for a short while had been forwarded), if he had used a keylogger (he's a bit of a computer expert and would know how to do it), he would have also got all my passwords and keycodes to shopping, banking, travel, etc...

If you're storing your passwords and all that other information on your computer (and using windows), the next time that happens, it will probably be due to someone you don't even know. Why on earth would you keep that information on a computer that uses an operating system for which hacking is a cottage industry? Geeezz. That's crazy.


That's overstating it a little, I think. You first have to be lawyer and client to give faulty advice, and a casual comment on an internet site's not usually going to be enough to establish that relationship. You kind of get a feel for where the line is.

The question to which I referred was about attorneys advising their clients in a divorce to hide assets. That would be illegal and advising a client to commit an illegal act would likely result in being disbarred (or at least a long suspension).


What do attorneys do when they are disbarred? Sell snake oil?

They get jobs as very knowledgable paralegals.
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 179
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 1:13:51 PM

For Miyawn67: The operator of an auto service is protected against theft charges by the "Mechanic's Lien" statutes, and I find it hard to believe that any court (or lawyer) would entertain a theft charge in the case of unpaid repair bills. I am personally aware of numerous cases in Canada and the US where persons attempting to take vehicles from a dealership (where bills were unpaid) were arrested and convicted of theft or attempted theft.


Exactly that is why the judge dismissed the case as soon as he saw the unpaid bill.

My point was that anyone can claim anything and if you can get a DA to agree to bring charges a case will be made.

Some on here act if he has already been convicted!

ed bear I was dumbfounded by the charges myself he had some friends that helped get the ball rolling.
However as soon as the FACTS were known it was clear the case should have never made it past the actuation.

I see this case in the same light. From a law that doesn't cover the supposed crime to a cheating wife that just wants to look like a victim.
 LinuxD
Joined: 12/6/2008
Msg: 180
view profile
History
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 1:50:42 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!

Care to take things out of context again? the point was there are ridiculous laws stll on the books that people will dig up to use in un-imaginable ways. I'm sure if some jackass tried it he'd be laughed out of court. just as this case should be.
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 181
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 3:25:00 PM

An “attempted crime” is the intent to commit a crime plus some affirmative step taken toward the commission of the crime. The intent of the actor may be inferred from the circumstance or his or her conduct. Let’s use Pitufina’s example; In the example, IF her ex was caught cold with this info and he cannot give a reasonable explanation as to why he possess the information, it raises the question of his intent and he could be charged with an attempted crime


First it must be determined if a crime was actually committed ( accessing her computer ), if not, an attempt to commit another crime is moot.

Even if it was determined assessing her computer was illegal, so far he can only be charged with breaking into her computer. And as you said: "Some affirmative step taken toward the commission of that crime" I don't see it in this case. No money was missing or transferred. His intent was to get to Pitufina’s email which he presented to the court.



In the case we are discussing, the statute requires only that he “access” in order to acquire property without authorization or beyond the scope of the authorization that had been given. So here (assuming for the purposes of illustration that there is a companion crime of “Attempted Access”) if he accessed her computer without authorization and with the intent to acquire her property (acknowledging the dispute about what constitutes “property”) and he didn’t actually acquire property, it would be an attempted crime.


Again we go to what is considered "Acquiring Property" is reading email considered acquiring property? Its going to be extremely hard to convince a jury. You are really assuming a lot for what you consider an "Attempted crime" with the examples you have given.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 182
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 4:02:04 PM
I see. I agree with you on that. I don’t see how ‘special knowledge’ enhances the charge. The statute makes absolutely no reference to the manner in which an account is accessed. He accessed the account somehow. Either he had authority from her to do so or he did not. HOW he accessed the account would seem to be a moot point.

The prosecutor seems to be relying on this point and I think how he accessed the account it DOES matter. The wife is claiming that he bought her the laptop and the that he got the passwords from the laptop, i.e., the actual hacking that took place was of HER laptop.

I suppose the prosecutor thinks it’s more inflammatory in the mind of the public if the guy had skills most people do not have.

There seem to be seperate enhancement statutes these days for doing something and having ``special knowledge'' that makes it possible. If you're a civil engineer for example and you have knowledge of bridge structures that enable to you blow up a bridge, I believe that falls into ``special knowledge.'' I believe that was originally created to use against people who were breaking encryption used to protect copyrighted content. In this case, I believe this is an element of the prosecutors case - at lest according to what I can find about the case written by folks in the legal business.

You mean you don’t think those issues are the turning points of this case?

No, what I mean is that I don't think it's clear what the DA is identifying as property that he acquired becaus it's not clear what access she is claiming is unauthorized. Was the property the passwords obtained by unauthorized access of the laptop, in which case, the ``special knowledge'' would be relevant, or is it the email he read, in which case the DA's arguments about using special knowledge make no sense. Once you pin down exactly what was supposed to be accessed without authorization and what property was acquired, then it makes sense to argue about whether or not the access was unauthorized and whether what is being called property is property. I've been trying to cover both possibilities, but I think most everyone has blurred these two seperate possibilities into one big rather nebulous idea of accessing email. There are two computers involved and two seperate things he could have obtained.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 183
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 4:21:33 PM
This is not a NEW article, it's from my local paper-the date of 12/30/10

DETROIT (AP) — A Michigan prosecutor is defending her decision to file charges against a man accused of hacking his estranged wife's email, saying the man broke state privacy laws.

Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper said Wednesday that charging Leon Walker with felony computer misuse has nothing to do with the couple's marital problems. She says he simply broke the law.

Cooper says Walker's estranged wife, Clara, realized her computer had been hacked when personal e-mails showed up in child custody pleadings involving her first husband. Cooper says the Walkers were going through a divorce when Clara Walker filed the complaint last March.

from

http://www.themorningsun.com/articles/2010/12/30/news/srv0000010449842.txt

I thought this was notable because it specifies that the charge has nothing to do with the couple's marital problems. I'm presuming that the evidence of the law-breaking was that Clara Walker's personal emails turned up in a proceeding involving her first husband. And it's described as breaking a privacy law-not a 'computer law'...it just happened that he used a computer to break that privacy law. Which would seem to line up with the "felony misuse of a computer" charge.
Just offering the simplistic Central Michigan interpretation of the issue.
Cindy O
 cap_n_mORGAN
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 184
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/13/2011 5:09:02 PM

And it's described as breaking a privacy law-not a 'computer law'...it just happened that he used a computer to break that privacy law. Which would seem to line up with the "felony misuse of a computer" charge.
Just offering the simplistic Central Michigan interpretation of the issue.


Still doesn't make it fall under a law that was not meant to cover such.
Seeing as the author of said law says it was not meant to cover it.
One would have to think he knows what he authored.

Again she is just trying to get back at him while playing the victim.

She found a DA that is willing to take up her banner for the PR!
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 185
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 9:46:28 AM
Well,apparently somebody somewhere believes what was in the emails should be kept private.
Here is what I make of this, based on reading numerous versions of the issue that are online, coming from journalistic sources.

The emails were not accessed to prove 'cheating'...and the couple had filed for divorce. The emails were accessed by the CURRENT divorcing husband and given to the woman's FIRST ex-husband, the father of the older of her 2 children. From what I gather in my reading, the aim here was not to prove cheating, it was an attempt to deprive her of custody of the 2 children, based on a past incident/incidents of her current lover abusing her. Because her current lover also happens to be her SECOND ex-huband.

Because sex and sensationalism sell papers, I think the media has focused on this supposedly being done to catch the woman cheating...when it was done AFTER divorce was filed, for the purpose of proving that she was putting the 2 children in a position to POSSIBLY witness her current lover abusing her. I do not know any of these people and I've thus far not seen any commentary or expert opinions as to how valid that might be.

As for the merits of the charges brought against the man, we could fight that until the church social next Sunday. But the presumption that the current divorcing husband accessed her email to "prove" she was cheating, IF one reads the articles, is not completely accurate-he was trying to "prove" that the 2 children might be placed in an emotionally dangerous situation.

Without disrespecting what the author(s) of the statute say it was MEANT to cover, the fact remains that the charge has withstood 2 attempts,before 2 different judges, to have it dismissed.
Cindy O
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 186
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 9:54:43 AM

Without disrespecting what the author(s) of the statute say it was MEANT to cover, the fact remains that the charge has withstood 2 attempts,before 2 different judges, to have it dismissed.

That's not much of a hurdle. Lawrence v Texas (the sodomy case) went to the Supreme court despite the existence of a clear statute outlawing sodomy. Given that in this case, one member of the legislature plans to introduce legislation to clarify the statute in a way that would make the entire trial pointless if he should be convicted, I'm not sure what point there is in pursuing the case.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 187
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 10:26:27 AM
Abelian, quite frankly I'm not certain about that either, but I would be inclined to think there may be a whole lot of undercurrent here that can't be conveyed in a media article or soundbyte.
Cindy O
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 188
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 10:47:32 AM

Abelian, quite frankly I'm not certain about that either, but I would be inclined to think there may be a whole lot of undercurrent here that can't be conveyed in a media article or soundbyte.

I don't see any undercurrent. All I see is that the prosecutor hasn't made clear, exactly what he's charged with by pinning the unauthorized access to a specific computer or identfying whether the enail or the passwords are supposed to be the property. I think a few expert witnesses will make that pretty clear and the less computer knowledgable will be thoroughly confused as to exactly what the charges are. I think that if the prosecutor really grasped the case for the technicalities, she would have been able to state her case so that at least I could figure out which computer she talking about. She keeps intermingling the laptop and gmail as if those were some single etherial concept called email.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 189
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 11:08:13 AM
Well, there again is something that those reporting on this issue might be trying to 'simplify' for the general newspaper-reading public.
From what reading I've done, it seems like he (the man charged) is the one alleging that it's a 'shared' computer, or that "he bought it for her" as part of his argument.
The fact is that however he acquired the password, this laptop computer was not the only way he could access her gmail account. With her password, he could have accessed her email at a library, or using a friends' computer, or a computer at his workplace(except that might create trouble if the employer has a "no personal business" policy regarding computer use). Had it been data kept in files on the hard drive of the laptop, the "shared computer" might be a defense. But it was email on a server that can be accessed from just about anywhere. So I would call the email account the "property". HE and his attorney(at the time) may have thought that the allegation that "it was a shared computer",carried some weight in the process of trying the case in the media. That's just a semi-educated semi-guess on my part. The prosecutor may have been trying to REBUT the " it was a shared computer" by pointing out that the email account was NOTa shared possession-again because of what appears to be 'trying the case in the media'.
Cindy O
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 190
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 2:30:52 PM

The fact is that however he acquired the password, this laptop computer was not the only way he could access her gmail account. With her password, he could have accessed her email at a library, or using a friends' computer, or a computer at his workplace(except that might create trouble if the employer has a "no personal business" policy regarding computer use). Had it been data kept in files on the hard drive of the laptop, the "shared computer" might be a defense. But it was email on a server that can be accessed from just about anywhere.


But part of her accusation was that he put a hacking device on the laptop. Changing the story to any computer could take away from the validity of her claim. Any hacking into gmail account would most likely leave evidence behind, unless he had her password to began with.

It also depends also on Gmails "Terms of service" on what they consider property and how its accessed. Often they put disclaimers to prevent from being sued. So if someone was too lax with their passwords out in the open for instance. That was covered earlier in this thread by another poster on gmails TOS.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 191
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 8:44:15 PM
I had not seen anything stating that he "put a hacking device" on the laptop. The prosecuting attorney stated that he used his special knowledge and skills as an information technologist to access his soon-to-be-ex wife's email account. None of the material I read mentioned any "device".
Cindy O
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 192
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 9:13:30 PM

I had not seen anything stating that he "put a hacking device" on the laptop. The prosecuting attorney stated that he used his special knowledge and skills as an information technologist to access his soon-to-be-ex wife's email account. None of the material I read mentioned any "device".
Cindy O


You can find it in the MSNBC ( Today show ) video, link provided by the OP: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40820892

It was quoted in news report:

"In court testimony it says Mrs Walker claimed he installed a hacking device".

Perhaps that was one way they alleged he used his "Special skills" in getting her password.

Note He himself claims he used the emails to confirm his suspicions of adultery, so its not just the media using sex and sensationalism to sell papers. They are reporting what he has been saying all along.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 193
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/14/2011 9:29:23 PM
I've got a really clunky dial-up connection, so it's not always easy to watch video clips. While I have no doubt that what you are telling me is true, I had not seen any mention of a "hacking device" in any of the written material I've read.

What might be tricky about that claim is that the accused stated that it was a shared computer, or in one article, it was "bought by him, for her". I'm questioning how someone could be accused of a felony in hacking their own computer. That doesn't mean that the email account itself was 'shared', the only thing I can think of is that he installed a keylogger...so is it felony misuse of a computer if you hack your own computer to steal another users' information?
There seems to be a fair amount of varying details in different reports which may be what's causing some of the confusion.
But the point that the headlines OBSCURE, is that he did not hack into her email to "catch her cheating", or "prove she was cheating". He accessed her personal email and copied certain messages, and provided them to another of her ex-husbands to be used against her in a child-custody matter.
I can only speculate that so many of the media that reported on this matter jumped on the "cheating" because it's more attention-grabbing- OR- the accused, who was the first one to go to the media, may have "spun" the story to make it seem like this is about catching a cheating spouse, in an effort to try the case in the court of public opinion.
Cindy O
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 194
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 9:28:16 AM

So I would call the email account the "property".

The account is not her property. It's clear she has no right to use it as if it were, since gmail dictates the terms under which she can use it. Furthermore, if the property is supposed to refer to her email, all of the commentary about the shared laptop is irrelevant. He used her password to access her gmail account and whatever question exists about authorization is whether he was authorized to access the account with the password.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 195
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 9:41:17 AM
So Gmail has a right to access anybody's email account and give copies if it to whomever they chose? This is what the man is accused of doing...making copies of her email communication and giving them to a 3rd party to be used in an adversarial proceedings-which could have caused her to lose custody of one of her children. I know children are not "property" per se, but that's beside the point.
Cindy O
 LinuxD
Joined: 12/6/2008
Msg: 196
view profile
History
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 10:29:20 AM
The whole point about it happening from "her" laptop is irrelevant. It could have been from any computer. A lot of people do not see to be able to separate the concept of a web based email account from on on a local machine like for instance Outlook. Gmail is stored on a remote server. it can be accessed from any computer in the world. Provided you have the account details. Whether or not it was from THAT laptop matters little. If it were Outlook Express then yes.. the information is transferred from a remote server onto the particular computer.

Furthermore the email in this situation is intangible "property" he did not remove it,destroy it,replace it or alter it. He printed out a tangible form of it.. The statute does not and was not intended to be used in a case like this. It's sensationalism at it's best .


So Gmail has a right to access anybody's email account and give copies if it to whomever they chose?



Pretty much if they choose to,yes they can. But that would be self defeating and no they don't. He used a computer and said it was the laptop in the home,when it could have been mine,yours or one at a library. Again the point about what computer it was from is moot.

He didn't "HACK" anything. He used a password. One that evidently was laying there. That is not Hacking. He ACCESSED an account using a valid password as opposed to trying to brute-force his way in. Another case of the media blowing things out of proportion. Most people have no idea what "hacking" is and most hacking isn't hacking,it's cracking there is a difference. It's an example of a word that is misapplied
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 197
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 10:39:07 AM
Linux, I absolutely agree with you that the sensationalism has clouded the real issues.
I for one GET the concept of web-based email.
This would be just a semi-educated semi-guess on my part, but my experience in arguments between humans makes me think that it is the accused person and his counsel stressing the "shared laptop" claim to OVERsimplify the issue,to bring up the question "how/why would he "hack", or need to "hack" a computer he had an ownership interest in?"
My overall impression is that it is the accused and his counsel who went first to the media and are trying to make this seem to be about something that it really is not...hoping to spin public opinion in their favor.
Cindy O
 LinuxD
Joined: 12/6/2008
Msg: 198
view profile
History
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 1:13:55 PM
In my opinion,he is in the wrong for accessing her account. whether the password was there for him to see or not. just because I know where my landlords spare key to his house is does not mean I can enter it anytime I wish. She is guilty of deception and underhandedness. neither of which are punishable until a law has been broken.

On his part if there is not a law against it then no law has been broken and he cannot be charged. You can't twist an existing law to fit the circumstances unless you are seeking sensationalism the law must be amended,or a new law written.

The law being used against him clearly does not fit what he is accused of,nor was it intended to.

Common sense seems to be lacking in all stages in this case.
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 199
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 3:32:08 PM

In my opinion,he is in the wrong for accessing her account


While it might of been wrong, I think it was justified. When you start adding a third party into a marriage, you create a love triangle that can have very bad results.

She puts his health at risk ( STD's, some of which are incurable ) financial difficulties & child endangerment issues. Then even if the wife breaks off the affair, some guys will start a stalking scenario similar to "Fatal attraction" That puts the husband and child in danger. So who's fault would it be then?


She is guilty of deception and underhandedness. neither of which are punishable until a law has been broken


Apparently the adultery law is still in effect in Michigan, so in effect she did break the law, even though he did not pursue it in court.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 200
For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating
Posted: 1/15/2011 4:07:51 PM
From the bulk of the reading I've done...the divorce had been filed. Apparently the the divorcing couple was still residing under the same roof. While I know it's not a guarantee, I would make a thoughtful guess that they were no longer having sex with each other, and while technically they might have been still married until the divorce was finalized, trying to charge her with adultery would have been pretty much a wash.
What it seems like to me, is that the issue is actually him accessing her email without her knowledge and permission,to use it against her in matters of child custody. Were the children actually in danger of witnessing their mother being beaten, or was this just another weapon for the divorcing husband to use against her? Who knows!?
It was the (ex)husband who first took this to the media, and I believe there is an attempt being made by him to obscure the real issue and 'spin' the situation to bring public opinion against the (ex)wife,essentially trying the case in the media.
The husband did not snoop to catch his wife cheating. He snooped on his partner in a marriage that was all over, bar the shouting-and what he was looking for was leverage using her children.
Make no mistake, I'm not on ANYBODY'S "side"here, simply trying to point out that the ex-husband-probably on the advice of counsel-is trying to make the issue out to be about something that it is NOT about.
To all practical purposes, the marriage was over, he wasn't looking for proof of "cheating", he was looking for proof that the children were sometimes in the presence of both their mother, AND her current lover( another ex-husband with a documented history of abusing her),and might witness their mother being abused. One of the children is from her first marriage, the other belongs to the newest ex-husband(the alleged email hacker)...I'm going to make what's probably a pretty good guess that he was trying to have custody of the children taken away from her.
Between the accused's "spin" and the media desire for simplistic sensationalism, it's being made out that the issue is 'catching her cheating"-when what it is actually about is taking her children away from her because of her current relationship.
Cindy O
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > For those that have no qualms snooping to find out if their partner is cheating