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.
There is an interesting current legal case in which a female employee of a large insurer stole $5million from company accounts over three years. The woman is gay and reccently married her partner earlier this year after our state legalized gay marriage by judicial fiat. Now there is a legal battle as to whether the "spouse" can be compelled to testify against the embezzler, as husband and wife, according to the law, cannot testify against one another. What about wife and wife? It is creating an interesting legal battle.
The marital privilege should be extended to all people married under the laws of the state. Period.
I don't see how it would be difficult to equally apply everything, or make things gender neutral -- "spouse against spouse" --- not "husband against wife."
The marital privilege should be extended to all people married under the laws of the state. Period.
I don't see how it would be difficult to equally apply everything, or make things gender neutral -- "spouse against spouse" --- not "husband against wife."
You don't indicate where you're from, but I very much doubt that this is even a question.
First off, if the law in your state is anything like the law in Vermont, the two parties to a same sex marriage have exactly the same rights, privileges, and duties as the parties to a two sex marriage.
Second, if the rules of evidence in your state are the same as in most other states, it is not accurate to say that a person cannot testify against his or her spouse in a court proceeding. The spousal privilege is a privilege that enables one spouse to refuse to disclose, and to prevent his/her spouse to disclose, the contents of confidential communications between the spouses.
Thus, if one spouse commits a crime and then confesses that crime to the other spouse, that confession can be excluded under the spousal privilege.
On the other hand, if one spouse sees another spouse commit a crime, the existence of the marriage is not a bar to the admission of the eyewitness testimony.
There is an interesting current legal case in which a female employee of a large insurer stole $5million from company accounts over three years. The woman is gay and reccently married her partner earlier this year after our state legalized gay marriage by judicial fiat. Now there is a legal battle as to whether the "spouse" can be compelled to testify against the embezzler, as husband and wife, according to the law, cannot testify against one another. What about wife and wife? It is creating an interesting legal battle.
I do not see the problem. It is the same for all married couples, being gay or lesbian as NOTHING to do with anything.
Casper
There is an interesting current legal case in which a female employee of a large insurer stole $5million from company accounts over three years. The woman is gay and reccently married her partner earlier this year after our state legalized gay marriage by judicial fiat. Now there is a legal battle as to whether the "spouse" can be compelled to testify against the embezzler, as husband and wife, according to the law, cannot testify against one another. What about wife and wife? It is creating an interesting legal battle.
I would think that if they are married the wife wouldn't have to testify against the wife. Not a hard question.
There is an interesting current legal case in which a female employee of a large insurer stole $5million from company accounts over three years. The woman is gay and reccently married her partner earlier this year after our state legalized gay marriage by judicial fiat. Now there is a legal battle as to whether the "spouse" can be compelled to testify against the embezzler, as husband and wife, according to the law, cannot testify against one another. What about wife and wife? It is creating an interesting legal battle.
Gay or straight, call it all a marriage, and make it "spouse" instead of unnecessary complications, "husband testifying against/for wife", "wife testifying against/for husband", "wife against/for wife", "husband against/for husband"...
How about: "A person can testify against/for spouse"? No need for unnecessary complexity. As they say: Keep It Simple Stupid.
I do not see the problem. It is the same for all married couples, being gay or lesbian as NOTHING to do with anything.
Casper
Well, I guess that is the law in your mind. However, our state law states that a husband or wife cannot be compelled to testify against thier will against thier spouse. So, there IS actually a legal debate on what constitutes a "spouse". Secondly, the legalization of gay marriage was made by judicial fiat, not the vote of the people, and the dems are going to take beating in the next election cycle for it- it will be overturned by the people, which further complicates the situation. Just an interesting legal issue regarding gay marriage.
I guess you're looking forward to a Prop. 8-style battle in Iowa, just like Maine is going through right now with Question 1.
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.
