Man Abuses Wife, Faces Felony Charges

:lol: Adultry isn't illegal..

sSubZerOo

Except in the Army.

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

anyone who is supporting this case needs to have a reality check. Sure, people have a right to privacy which is not void upon marriage, but it is really not a big deal if your spouse reads your mail. It is annoying and a violation of trust, and ample reason for divorce, but definately not a legal case. Besides, women do this to men all the time and are applauded for exposing their big bad cheating husbands. Our culture is so biased towards females its rediculous.

MrGeezer

You already admit that the woman's right to privacy wasn't voided upon getting married, and then say that "it isn't a big deal" that he violated that right?

WHAT?!

Hacking into her account potentially has SERIOUS repercussions, ESPECIALLY since the guy gaining access to the account illegally also has suspicions about the account that he's illegally gaining access to. The potential repercussions of that are Dead Serious.

Imagine a police officer just "knowing" that a particular person is a murderer or drug dealer, and then violating that suspect's rights by illegally sneaking into their home in order to gain evidence. That's serious ****, completely and utterly illegal.

If you admit that the woman still has a RIGHT to maintain a private account, which is NOT voided upon marriage, then breaking into her email account sort of IS a big ****ing deal. The only way it's NOT a big ****ing deal is if the woman whose account was illegally broken into doesn't have a problem with it. Obviously this woman DID have a problem with it, so it IS a big ****ing deal.

The difference between your example and this issueis that they were married, and that breaking and entering is much worse than "computer misuse". Your example has no validity in this debate. Technically speaking, breaking into her mail was illegal and could be charged if you interpret privacy laws verbatum, but this is reality. The wife probably does not even have a big problem with the break in, she is just using it as a way to get the guy in jail. In any normal relationship, this would never happen and neither party would care at all. You failed to meet my point that women do this exact thing a lot. It is much more common than you would think. but when they doi it, they aren't charged, but applauded. It seems to me that you have a distinctly female bias. And stop indenting every sentance, using bolds and asterixes- it is hard to read.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

anyone who is supporting this case needs to have a reality check. Sure, people have a right to privacy which is not void upon marriage, but it is really not a big deal if your spouse reads your mail. It is annoying and a violation of trust, and ample reason for divorce, but definately not a legal case. Besides, women do this to men all the time and are applauded for exposing their big bad cheating husbands. Our culture is so biased towards females its rediculous.

Tokugawa77

You already admit that the woman's right to privacy wasn't voided upon getting married, and then say that "it isn't a big deal" that he violated that right?

WHAT?!

Hacking into her account potentially has SERIOUS repercussions, ESPECIALLY since the guy gaining access to the account illegally also has suspicions about the account that he's illegally gaining access to. The potential repercussions of that are Dead Serious.

Imagine a police officer just "knowing" that a particular person is a murderer or drug dealer, and then violating that suspect's rights by illegally sneaking into their home in order to gain evidence. That's serious ****, completely and utterly illegal.

If you admit that the woman still has a RIGHT to maintain a private account, which is NOT voided upon marriage, then breaking into her email account sort of IS a big ****ing deal. The only way it's NOT a big ****ing deal is if the woman whose account was illegally broken into doesn't have a problem with it. Obviously this woman DID have a problem with it, so it IS a big ****ing deal.

The difference between your example and this issueis that they were married, and that breaking and entering is much worse than "computer misuse". Your example has no validity in this debate. Technically speaking, breaking into her mail was illegal and could be charged if you interpret privacy laws verbatum, but this is reality. The wife probably does not even have a big problem with the break in, she is just using it as a way to get the guy in jail. In any normal relationship, this would never happen and neither party would care at all. You failed to meet my point that women do this exact thing a lot. It is much more common than you would think. but when they doi it, they aren't charged, but applauded. It seems to me that you have a distinctly female bias. And stop indenting every sentance, using bolds and asterixes- it is hard to read.

Women routinely do what the guy did, and end up getting away with it?

Okay, then. How many of those men do you think end up PRESSING CHARGES? Yeah, exactly.

It doesn't matter that they are married, unless you can show me some actual legal precedent that hacking into another person's account STOPS being a crime once you get married to them.

So again...let's start with that. Can you show me some ACTUAL legal precedent that shows that hacking into another person's private account stops being illegal once you get married to them?

And you can accuse me of having a distinctly female bias, but I've earned nearly 50,000 posts here over more than 5 years, and see MASSIVE misogyny being portrayed here. Dude, look at where you're posting. As someone else said, I strongly suggest that the people here would have little or no problem with the woman being charged for a crime if their roles were reversed. If it was the MAN who cheated, and then the WOMAN was being charged with a serious crime for hacking into HIS account, then I suspect that a LOT more people would be calling for her to go to prison.

But we can stand here all day saying, "you probably just hate men", or "you're wrong, because it looks like you're sexist against women." But that doesn't really have a single ****ing thing to do with the actual case, does it?

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

You already admit that the woman's right to privacy wasn't voided upon getting married, and then say that "it isn't a big deal" that he violated that right?

WHAT?!

Hacking into her account potentially has SERIOUS repercussions, ESPECIALLY since the guy gaining access to the account illegally also has suspicions about the account that he's illegally gaining access to. The potential repercussions of that are Dead Serious.

Imagine a police officer just "knowing" that a particular person is a murderer or drug dealer, and then violating that suspect's rights by illegally sneaking into their home in order to gain evidence. That's serious ****, completely and utterly illegal.

If you admit that the woman still has a RIGHT to maintain a private account, which is NOT voided upon marriage, then breaking into her email account sort of IS a big ****ing deal. The only way it's NOT a big ****ing deal is if the woman whose account was illegally broken into doesn't have a problem with it. Obviously this woman DID have a problem with it, so it IS a big ****ing deal.

MrGeezer

The difference between your example and this issueis that they were married, and that breaking and entering is much worse than "computer misuse". Your example has no validity in this debate. Technically speaking, breaking into her mail was illegal and could be charged if you interpret privacy laws verbatum, but this is reality. The wife probably does not even have a big problem with the break in, she is just using it as a way to get the guy in jail. In any normal relationship, this would never happen and neither party would care at all. You failed to meet my point that women do this exact thing a lot. It is much more common than you would think. but when they doi it, they aren't charged, but applauded. It seems to me that you have a distinctly female bias. And stop indenting every sentance, using bolds and asterixes- it is hard to read.

Women routinely do what the guy did, and end up getting away with it?

Okay, then. How many of those men do you think end up PRESSING CHARGES? Yeah, exactly.

It doesn't matter that they are married, unless you can show me some actual legal precedent that hacking into another person's account STOPS being a crime once you get married to them.

So again...let's start with that. Can you show me some ACTUAL legal precedent that shows that hacking into another person's private account stops being illegal once you get married to them?

And you can accuse me of having a distinctly female bias, but I've earned nearly 50,000 posts here over more than 5 years, and see MASSIVE misogyny being portrayed here. Dude, look at where you're posting. As someone else said, I strongly suggest that the people here would have little or no problem with the woman being charged for a crime if their roles were reversed. If it was the MAN who cheated, and then the WOMAN was being charged with a serious crime for hacking into HIS account, then I suspect that a LOT more people would be calling for her to go to prison.

But we can stand here all day saying, "you probably just hate men", or "you're wrong, because it looks like you're sexist against women." But that doesn't really have a single ****ing thing to do with the actual case, does it?

Did you even read my post? I distinctly said that what the guy did is illegal. However, it is one of those things that are technically illegalbut in practice, they happen everyday such as fireworks, bonfires, not wearing seatbelts, and a myriad of other petty "crimes". I am merely pointing out that this specific case, while it does have legal precident, is rediculous and it is obvious to me, and indeed to everyone on this thread save for you, that the woman is pressing charges only to harm the husband rather than because she was victimized and seeks justuce. In other words, she is exploiting the legal system. For the record, i am against any criminal charges being pressed against either party, man or woman, in a situation such as this. I find it completely disgusting on the whole. I believe that you have a female bias because i just cannot comprehend the logic that you have that allows you justify charges such as these. That's just it- there is no logic.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

In a marriage all things are shared.. this should be thrown out soon.

Man finds out his wife's a slut and he's the one punished. Gotta love the justice system.

so she cheated on him? I see no reason for charges.

Man finds out his wife's a slut and he's the one punished. Gotta love the justice system.

Verge_6

Being a slut isn't illegal. Accessing someone's private information without their consent is.

That's....strange. He discovers her having an affair, and gets charged. Although, it does beg the question. Why was he trying to gain accesss to her email address?l4dak47

Did you even read my post? I distinctly said that what the guy did is illegal. However, it is one of those things that are technically illegalbut in practice, they happen everyday such as fireworks, bonfires, not wearing seatbelts, and a myriad of other petty "crimes". I am merely pointing out that this specific case, while it does have legal precident, is rediculous and it is obvious to me, and indeed to everyone on this thread save for you, that the woman is pressing charges only to harm the husband rather than because she was victimized and seeks justuce. In other words, she is exploiting the legal system. For the record, i am against any criminal charges being pressed against either party, man or woman, in a situation such as this. I find it completely disgusting on the whole. I believe that you have a female bias because i just cannot comprehend the logic that you have that allows you justify charges such as these. That's just it- there is no logic.

Tokugawa77

Dude, you freely admit that the man DID COMMIT A CRIME against the woman, and then have the nerve to get all upset at the woman for actually pressing charges.

Anything else you say is irrelevant. Is it a crime? Yes? Well then, the man deserves to be punished for it.

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]That's....strange. He discovers her having an affair, and gets charged. Although, it does beg the question. Why was he trying to gain accesss to her email address?lightleggy

I'll bet you'd care if you DID have something to hide.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Man finds out his wife's a slut and he's the one punished. Gotta love the justice system.

worlock77

Being a slut isn't illegal. Accessing someone's private information without their consent is.

:lol: That's just crap. I was expecting to come in here and say he got what he deserved but this is crazy.BreakTheseLinks

im hoping and if this was a sane world. the prosecutor would be jailed for life in solidatry confinement. the wife would be jailed for having an affair. be forced to pay child support when she gets out and anybody that argues with me and says im wrong in this case would get stoned. but a fair world does not existkayoticdreamz

[QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"] im hoping and if this was a sane world. the prosecutor would be jailed for life in solidatry confinement. the wife would be jailed for having an affair. be forced to pay child support when she gets out and anybody that argues with me and says im wrong in this case would get stoned. but a fair world does not existchessmaster1989

I can't help but think that if it were a woman snooping through her husband/boyfriend's e-mail most here would be saying that she got what she deserved.

worlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

I can't help but think that if it were a woman snooping through her husband/boyfriend's e-mail most here would be saying that she got what she deserved.

-Big_Red-

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]

Wair he had a suspicion that his wife was cheating, and was right and that is a felony. Tell me I am misinterpreting this.

No, the felony is that he accessed private information without her consent.

[QUOTE="Palantas"]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40820892/

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20026611-71.html

A man in Michigan used his Wife's password to access Her Gmail account, and out She was having an affair. He now stands accused of felony computer misuse charges. This is ridiculous.

The maximum penalty for computer misuse is five years. Clearly this pathetic man should be chemically neutered. Its absurd in American society the way womyn are confined and forced into humiliating roles by a corrupt imperialist patriarchy. Men are allowed to abuse and intimidate, and even when they are punished, as in this case, it is never severe enough.

Third Wave!!

Are these serious comments? You think this man should have to be put in jail for more than 5 years?

I was going to say something to you... But you confirmed my suspicions of you being... Not too bright.. So I'll just leave you alone.-Big_Red-

Uh...you just DID say something to me. You actively and deliberately took the time and effort to call me stupid, instead of addressing the topic at hand.

It's funny that, having access to something that would utterly destroy my argument and make me out to be a fool, you instead chose to simply CALL ME a fool instead of actually destroying my argument. It's funny how you SUPPOSEDLY could have said something that would OBJECTIVELY make me out to be an idiot once and for all. But instead, decided NOT to post that, in favor of simply calling me an idiot.

Funny how you SUPPOSEDLY had a way to attack my argument, but instead decided to resort to PERSONAL attacks which really don't have a ****ing thing to do with the argument. Maybe I really AM a dumb ****, but that doesn't mean that you're any brighter, or that I wasn't RIGHT.

Anyway, if you ever decide to discuss the issue in question, then feel free to do so. Until then, you're free to avoid the discussion by calling people idiots as a way of avoiding having to say anything of substance.

Women routinely do what the guy did, and end up getting away with it?

Okay, then. How many of those men do you think end up PRESSING CHARGES? Yeah, exactly.

It doesn't matter that they are married, unless you can show me some actual legal precedent that hacking into another person's account STOPS being a crime once you get married to them.

So again...let's start with that. Can you show me some ACTUAL legal precedent that shows that hacking into another person's private account stops being illegal once you get married to them?

And you can accuse me of having a distinctly female bias, but I've earned nearly 50,000 posts here over more than 5 years, and see MASSIVE misogyny being portrayed here. Dude, look at where you're posting. As someone else said, I strongly suggest that the people here would have little or no problem with the woman being charged for a crime if their roles were reversed. If it was the MAN who cheated, and then the WOMAN was being charged with a serious crime for hacking into HIS account, then I suspect that a LOT more people would be calling for her to go to prison.

But we can stand here all day saying, "you probably just hate men", or "you're wrong, because it looks like you're sexist against women." But that doesn't really have a single ****ing thing to do with the actual case, does it?

MrGeezer

I'm not sure which position I take here, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here for a second.

It seems to me that it's a bit of a stretch to say that the person "hacked into her account". The article says that the password for it was literally just lying around the house. Furthermore, I did some digging. Here is the specific statute under which the man is being charged. The purpose of the law is clearly to prevent malicious hackers from causing material damage, considering that it specifies "acquir(ing), alter(ing), damag(ing), delet(ing), or destroy(ing) property".

Now, granted, it does additionally specify "or otherwise use the service of a computer program, computer, computer system, or computer network". However, this kind of strikes me as a situation where the spirit of the law ought to be taken into consideration. The woman did all of her emailing on a computer jointly owned by her and her husband. The password for her account was laying in plain sight; he did not brute-force his way into it. In addition, to my knowledge he did not do anything in her email other than simply confirm his suspicions that she was cheating on him. He did not delete anything, steal anything, commit any acts of character defamation, or otherwise perform any operation that would have harmed her materially or in terms of her standing with another person. As such I cannot imagine any but the most legalistic, literal, strained reading of the statute in question that would lead one to believe that the man in question committed an act deserving of a felony charge clearly intended to be used against one who maliciously breaks into a system and causes material damage.

That very excerpt says "acquiring" "destroying" damaging" so the means used to obtain information that are supposedly confidential are irrelevant in penal law as long as they lead to the same result and the man has no right obtain it. I think the man's lawyer could prove that it was done with the wife's consent otherwise she wouldn't leave such piece of information on a note for everyone to see when she ought to keep it hidden. I can't write my password on a banner for everyone to see and not expect people to use it.

I think he should be killed very hard until he's dead

Why is this so shocking, this is what every single divorce lawyer does..Mr_Alexander

Not anymore. The term "irreconcilable differences" is enough for courts these days.

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="l4dak47"]That's....strange. He discovers her having an affair, and gets charged. Although, it does beg the question. Why was he trying to gain accesss to her email address?MrGeezer

I'll bet you'd care if you DID have something to hide.

I'm not sure which position I take here, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here for a second.

It seems to me that it's a bit of a stretch to say that the person "hacked into her account". The article says that the password for it was literally just lying around the house. Furthermore, I did some digging. Here is the specific statute under which the man is being charged. The purpose of the law is clearly to prevent malicious hackers from causing material damage, considering that it specifies "acquir(ing), alter(ing), damag(ing), delet(ing), or destroy(ing) property".

Now, granted, it does additionally specify "or otherwise use the service of a computer program, computer, computer system, or computer network". However, this kind of strikes me as a situation where the spirit of the law ought to be taken into consideration. The woman did all of her emailing on a computer jointly owned by her and her husband. The password for her account was laying in plain sight; he did not brute-force his way into it. In addition, to my knowledge he did not do anything in her email other than simply confirm his suspicions that she was cheating on him. He did not delete anything, steal anything, commit any acts of character defamation, or otherwise perform any operation that would have harmed her materially or in terms of her standing with another person. As such I cannot imagine any but the most legalistic, literal, strained reading of the statute in question that would lead one to believe that the man in question committed an act deserving of a felony charge clearly intended to be used against one who maliciously breaks into a system and causes material damage.

GabuEx

It's still unauthorized access. It doesn't matter if she left the password lying around. Hell, just because I leave my front door open doesn't mean you're allowed to walk right in.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] its his wife for crying out loud...I wouldnt give a damm if my wife would check on my email account, I have nothing to hidelightleggy

I'll bet you'd care if you DID have something to hide.

And she shouldn't be checking out your emails without your consent.

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

I'll bet you'd care if you DID have something to hide.

MrGeezer

And she shouldn't be checking out your emails without your consent.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] I shouldnt have something to hidelightleggy

And she shouldn't be checking out your emails without your consent.

I've asked for it before, and I have yet for anyone to provide me with any legal documentation proving that marriage eliminates one's right to privacy. Show me some legal basis for that actually being HIS account as well. Otherwise, it wasn't his email account and he wasn't authorized to access it.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

In a marriage all things are shared.. this should be thrown out soon.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

And she shouldn't be checking out your emails without your consent.

MrGeezer

I've asked for it before, and I have yet for anyone to provide me with any legal documentation proving that marriage eliminates one's right to privacy. Show me some legal basis for that actually being HIS account as well. Otherwise, it wasn't his email account and he wasn't authorized to access it.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Man finds out his wife's a slut and he's the one punished. Gotta love the justice system.

Verge_6

Being a slut isn't illegal. Accessing someone's private information without their consent is.

Please tell me: what misguided point was that?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]

Wair he had a suspicion that his wife was cheating, and was right and that is a felony. Tell me I am misinterpreting this.

-Big_Red-

No, the felony is that he accessed private information without her consent.

That the woman pressed charges on someone who accessed her private information without her consent? Absolutely it's justified. Five years in prison may be bit harsh, but the woman was absolutely justified in pressing charges.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] when you get married you make your vows and they say that you will share EVERYTHINGlightleggy

I've asked for it before, and I have yet for anyone to provide me with any legal documentation proving that marriage eliminates one's right to privacy. Show me some legal basis for that actually being HIS account as well. Otherwise, it wasn't his email account and he wasn't authorized to access it.

What vows would those be?

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Being a slut isn't illegal. Accessing someone's private information without their consent is.

worlock77

Please tell me: what misguided point was that?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] Way to miss the point?Verge_6

Please tell me: what misguided point was that?

So you have no point. Ok then.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Please tell me: what misguided point was that?

worlock77

So you have no point. Ok then.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] Why should I tell you if you're going to be a condescending egotist? :)Verge_6

So you have no point. Ok then.

If you have a legit point you should be willing to back it up no matter how much of an "egotist" you may think I am.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

So you have no point. Ok then.

worlock77

If you have a legit point you should be willing to back it up no matter how much of an "egotist" you may think I am.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] You just proved it, really. ;)Verge_6

If you have a legit point you should be willing to back it up no matter how much of an "egotist" you may think I am.

Yup. That's how it works. Unless of course you're not actually interested in debate or exchanging opinions and just want to hear for those who agree with you.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

If you have a legit point you should be willing to back it up no matter how much of an "egotist" you may think I am.

worlock77

Yup. That's how it works. Unless of course you're not actually interested in debate or exchanging opinions and just want to hear for those who agree with you.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] I should?Verge_6

Yup. That's how it works. Unless of course you're not actually interested in debate or exchanging opinions and just want to hear for those who agree with you.

I'm on this thread right now. You say I miss your point, but you refuse to state what that point is and yet you accuse me of being an egotist. What else is there to take from this other than you're not actually interested in debate?

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Yup. That's how it works. Unless of course you're not actually interested in debate or exchanging opinions and just want to hear for those who agree with you.

worlock77

I'm on this thread right now. You say I miss your point, but you refuse to state what that point is and yet you accuse me of being an egotist. What else is there to take from this other than you're not actually interested in debate?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] Maybe you should focus more attention on that Santa banning thread. ;)Verge_6

I'm on this thread right now. You say I miss your point, but you refuse to state what that point is and yet you accuse me of being an egotist. What else is there to take from this other than you're not actually interested in debate?

Sure, perhaps saying "misguided" was poor on my part, but it's no more condescending than saying that I missed the point, but not clarifying what that point was. So if you'd like to clarify your point then perhaps we can get past this little pissing match and back to the topic on hand.