• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Man charged after reading wife's email on shared computer

I think it comes down to he said the computer was the family computer. Where as she says it was her personal computer. So prob why its going to trial to see who has ownership of the computer or if it was shared.

She is just mad that she was sloppy like so many people are in her shoes. Its on this guy though. He was husband number 3. Should of told him the woman was trash and should of kept walking.
 
Crude said:
True, men and women aren't treated as equals, but no one fights for mens rights.
Click to expand...

I don't know you see more and more fathers getting costody of their kids. The courts are looking past a woman as the mother figure and the child is automatically safer with her. Just like a few months back in the news. A woman had her 4 year old son on a visit and she let her bf beat the the child. Then locked the child in a room. Went to the court house and got married. Came back and he beat the child till he was dead. Then they got scared and she helped him mutilate this child face so he couldn't be id. Just because you give birth to a child. Don't mean it makes you a mother automatically. The courts are seeing this but it's a slow process.

My cousin has custody of his two girls. So the system can work. You just have to be willing to fight and never give up. It's hard but can be done.
 
Dark Jedi said:
I don't know you see more and more fathers getting costody of their kids. The courts are looking past a woman as the mother figure and the child is automatically safer with her. Just like a few months back in the news. A woman had her 4 year old son on a visit and she let her bf beat the the child. Then locked the child in a room. Went to the court house and got married. Came back and he beat the child till he was dead. Then they got scared and she helped him mutilate this child face so he couldn't be id. Just because you give birth to a child. Don't mean it makes you a mother automatically. The courts are seeing this but it's a slow process.

My cousin has custody of his two girls. So the system can work. You just have to be willing to fight and never give up. It's hard but can be done.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the cases where the system works in father's favor are few and far between.

Overwhelmingly, the courts automatically award primary custody to the mothers. They don't have to prove a darn thing.

And if they claim you abuse the child (doesn't matter that it's not true)... you will be lucky if you ever see that child again.
 
Courts are changing somewhat,joint custody is in many ways a good alternative,especially when the parents can accept it's not about win/lose,it.s what works on behalf of the well being of the children.It's pretty difficult for a judge to decide why joint custody isn't a good direction to take.
Granted it requires civility & muturity on the parents part for it to work well for all involved but it can & should be done.
 
byteware said:
Unfortunately, the cases where the system works in father's favor are few and far between.

Overwhelmingly, the courts automatically award primary custody to the mothers. They don't have to prove a darn thing.

And if they claim you abuse the child (doesn't matter that it's not true)... you will be lucky if you ever see that child again.
Click to expand...

But change is happening. Like anything in the court system it's a slow process. He went through the whole physical abuse but was proven wrong. Now CPS won't even take her phone calls now.

It sounds like you have personal experience on this.
 
This varies by state. In NM, the immediate ruling is for joint legal custody and then a simple petition for residential custody. With a little counseling where needed, parents can act in the kids' best interests.

I had custody of my kids years ago (granddad now) - it's just not at all uncommon here.
 
Dark Jedi said:
I don't know you see more and more fathers getting costody of their kids. The courts are looking past a woman as the mother figure and the child is automatically safer with her. Just like a few months back in the news. A woman had her 4 year old son on a visit and she let her bf beat the the child. Then locked the child in a room. Went to the court house and got married. Came back and he beat the child till he was dead. Then they got scared and she helped him mutilate this child face so he couldn't be id. Just because you give birth to a child. Don't mean it makes you a mother automatically. The courts are seeing this but it's a slow process.

My cousin has custody of his two girls. So the system can work. You just have to be willing to fight and never give up. It's hard but can be done.
Click to expand...

EarlyMon said:
This varies by state. In NM, the immediate ruling is for joint legal custody and then a simple petition for residential custody. With a little counseling where needed, parents can act in the kids' best interests.

I had custody of my kids years ago (granddad now) - it's just not at all uncommon here.
Click to expand...

My experience is somewhere in the middle. When I got engaged to be re-married, my ex-wife took me to court to try to get sole custody. On the grounds that I was subjecting him to an immoral relationship. Despite the fact that he has lived primarily with me his entire life (he just turned 12) and has received nearly all of his financial support from me, I was forced to either A) settle out of court and allow more visitation for her, or B)risk losing custody of him all together in court. I took the lesser of two evils and let her have more custody.

We know how to determine when someone has beaten a child, set them on fire, or otherwise physically harm them. We have laws that spell that out. But there is nothing illegal about being a deadbeat, emotionally bankrupt parent. And in court, that doesn't mean you're a bad parent. Especially if you are the mother.
 
Back on topic.

I do kinda feel bad for the guy.

He looks like a really respectable guy with a job, career, and well life.

As a tech person.. I hate that the media tries to peg the guy as some sort of hacker.

I heard on the news some say he "hacked it" others say she kept her password in a notebook by the computer.

Personally i think she had "autologin" selected and he got curios.

I do believe people have a right to privacy and all that jazz.

But, I also think when your married.. the line does get a little blurry.

I mean I lived with my girlfriend.. We could never remember eachothers passwords for email and stuff to save our lives.. but, on at least 4 or 5 occassions She would ask me to go into her accounts for something or another.

I think if the woman was that overly defensive of her privacy that would have been a signal int he first place..
 
The charge against the guy won't stand up in court,that law was not designed for the the incident/infraction in this case.I would be surprised if it's not thrown out altogether.The charge stemmed from the wife/overly aggressive attorney,it's akin to the best defense is a good offense by taking the heat off the wife's affair.
 
byteware said:
Using his wife's password, a man accessed his wife's email on their shared computer and discovered she was having an affair.

Now he is charged with felony misusing a computer.

What do you think? Justified?
Click to expand...

Not justified.

He violated her privacy - that's reprehensible. She had an affair - that's reprehensible. Both are equal expressions of violation of trust.

He was criminally stupid to not see that they were done when it got to the point that he found he needed to snoop into her computer.

She was criminally stupid to not see the insanity of staying with someone when she was done.

Whether it was all his fault because he's an overbearing control freak or all her fault because she's a heartless floozy doesn't matter.

What matters is that this is a case of mutual criminal stoopidity and the criminal courts are clogged enough with real crimes - therefore - legal actions against the symptoms are not justified.

A court would probably disagree with me, though.
 
I'm a little late to this party but the guy shouldnt be charged with a crime and I dont know what state this happened in but most states have community property laws for married people which means whether he bought it or she did the computer belongs equally to them both.

As to custody, well, I'm a father to two wonderful kids and I have primary custody of them. My ex gets to see them on weekends and school breaks but for the most part they're with me. Courts have changed. Most often times the guy bitching about not getting his kids either (A) pissed off the judge in the custody hearing or (B) failed to appear to court for custody hearing. Judges do not want to take kids away from parents for the life of them, so unless they're in danger, being neglected or abused, its pretty much equal in terms of custody for both parents, the tie breaker is who could provide a better home life for the kids

My ex's own parents have told her she should give up what custody she has of the kids and I still cant get full custody because she hasnt done anything to seriously harm them.
 
There is no precedent on this subject matter so it will not be easy to judge. The fact that it is a domestic issue plays in favor of the husband. It's a "shared", "family" computer. It's going to boil down to how he obtained the password. If he hacked(ambiguous), illegal. If she stayed logged in or ever told him the password which he happened to remember, not illegal.
 
What? When you get married you share bank accounts, file taxes jointly, can make medical decisions for an unconscious spouse, but checking email is a criminal invasion of privacy?

Get real please.

He should get back at her by charging her with forgery for signing his name to all those thank you cards over the years...
 
Tempusfugit said:
What? When you get married you share bank accounts, file taxes jointly, can make medical decisions for an unconscious spouse, but checking email is a criminal invasion of privacy?

Get real please.
Click to expand...

Agreed. What are the limitations of privacy in a marriage?
 
Knewz said:
Agreed. What are the limitations of privacy in a marriage?
Click to expand...

That's the million dollar question right there. I for one have no desires to look at my wifes e mails. Nor does she with me. Now I would have no problem showing her my account to her if she asked. With that said why would a spouse want to keep things from their spouse. If you have secrets and don't want him or her to know about. Most times its something you shouldn't be doing in the first place. After all this is your partner and shouldn't keep secrets from them. I remember a time I was at a friends house and this girl got drunk and was taking her clothes off showing everyone her weres. I must say they looked very nice. When I got home I told my wife everything that happened. All she said was you must of had fun. That was all that was said.


It all comes down to trust and with this guy he saw signs of her betraying that trust. So he needed to find proof and wether it was right or wrong he got his proof. Any person man or woman would do the same. At the same time should of been a red flag pop up as he would be the 4th husband to her. So maybe she not the marrying type.

I am not saying its right or wrong but why keep secrets from a person you agree to spend the rest of your life with. To me that's a sign of you are not ready to settle down.
 
At least in new york, the law doesn't take into account paternity/maternity. Judges on the other hand....
 
EarlyMon said:
Not justified.

He violated her privacy - that's reprehensible. She had an affair - that's reprehensible. Both are equal expressions of violation of trust.

He was criminally stupid to not see that they were done when it got to the point that he found he needed to snoop into her computer.

She was criminally stupid to not see the insanity of staying with someone when she was done.

Whether it was all his fault because he's an overbearing control freak or all her fault because she's a heartless floozy doesn't matter.

What matters is that this is a case of mutual criminal stoopidity and the criminal courts are clogged enough with real crimes - therefore - legal actions against the symptoms are not justified.

A court would probably disagree with me, though.
Click to expand...


When you are married, there is no "My computer" or "her computer"

This will fall flat on it's face in court. Her Lawyer is just trying to get some kind of favorable ruling because otherwise she's going to lose quite a bit in the divorce if it is not a no-fault state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom