Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Traystman says she immediately texted a friend and asked that person to change the passwords and delete some of her messages. That’s when he got the judge involved, to issue an injunction that she not delete any material and order the attorneys to exchange passwords for both spouses so that they could conduct discovery. Traystman says he reviewed his own client’s accounts before doing this and knew he had nothing to hide. I suggested to Traystman that it must have been painful for his client to go through his wife’s dating site communications. “It would be painful for many spouses to see what their spouses are doing,” he replied.
In “normal” discovery, a litigant is usually asked to turn over “responsive material” not the keys to access all that material and more, but it seems that judges are applying different standards to social networking accounts
In “normal” discovery, a litigant is usually asked to turn over “responsive material” not the keys to access all that material and more, but it seems that judges are applying different standards to social networking accounts
I guess you're not up to speed on Electronic Discovery.
Nothing outrageous here to see. Good ruling by the judge.
Ah. Well I would have told the judge to jump off a damn bridge then. Ain't none of anyone's business what is said between me and others.I hope the person that was told to turn over the pw said no or just defied the idiot judge.
Good decision on the part of the judge. In my household of eight, we have a "no secrets" policy. Everyone knows everyone else's passwords. My wife has access to all of my online correspondence and I have access to hers. We freely read each other's e-mail. We also read our children's e-mails, chats, message boards, etc., and they know it. The only exceptions are a few things we keep from the children due to age appropriateness.
A split personality is a marriage killer. If you have an integrated personality none of this will be a problem. There's no trust without it.
Ah. Well I would have told the judge to jump off a damn bridge then. Ain't none of anyone's business what is said between me and others.I hope the person that was told to turn over the pw said no or just defied the idiot judge.
I think you're wrong. If this was a murder trial, and you said things to others about your intention to kill for example, I think they have every reason to look into all correspondence, text, email, etc.
I think you're wrong. If this was a murder trial, and you said things to others about your intention to kill for example, I think they have every reason to look into all correspondence, text, email, etc.
first, this isnt a murder trial, and breakig the law offers different standards. Since the spousal couples were not breaking the law, any criminal law wouldnt apply.
Second, if you are online spouting off your intent to commit a crime, the individual YOU ARE TALKING to, has an expectation to divolge that information, not yourself.
Can you see the number of people just knocking on the prisons asking to be let in because they thought about robbing a bank.
Good decision on the part of the judge. In my household of eight, we have a "no secrets" policy. Everyone knows everyone else's passwords. My wife has access to all of my online correspondence and I have access to hers. We freely read each other's e-mail. We also read our children's e-mails, chats, message boards, etc., and they know it. The only exceptions are a few things we keep from the children due to age appropriateness.
A split personality is a marriage killer. If you have an integrated personality none of this will be a problem. There's no trust without it.
your willingness to open up yourself to your family isnt the issue, the issue is under what legal grounds the judge used to demand such actions.
The old, if you have nothing to hide, then you wont mind is bs. Why dont you give me your facebook login information so I can check it out? I bet you wont, will you?
Good decision on the part of the judge. In my household of eight, we have a "no secrets" policy. Everyone knows everyone else's passwords. My wife has access to all of my online correspondence and I have access to hers. We freely read each other's e-mail. We also read our children's e-mails, chats, message boards, etc., and they know it. The only exceptions are a few things we keep from the children due to age appropriateness.
A split personality is a marriage killer. If you have an integrated personality none of this will be a problem. There's no trust without it.
I agree there should be no secrets between people that are married and I agree parents should monitor what their children are saying,hearing and watching but these people were getting a divorce I see no reason they needed each others correspondence with other people.My wife knows my PW and I know hers. No reason to keep them from each other because there is nothing to hide but for a judge to demand them to swap pw is outside his jurisdiction and is pretty much putting him in the middle of their married life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
