Hypothetical SD/SB issue

[DSK]

Originally Posted by ftime

Let's assume a SB has been see a SD for over a year. He pays for her apartment for $1,900 a month to see her for part of the day and spend the night twice a month. He is from another state ( happens to be a community property state). He's married and his wife finds a pair a girls underwear in his suitcase and gets "upset". For the record didn't belong to the SB in question. After that, although he continues his relation, He is acting weird etc.

She begins to record their sexual meetings with a hidden camera with a time stamp on it. I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is since it's without his consent, she's broken some law. My guess is that the last thing in the world he wants to do is prosecute her for that.

He decides he shouldn't see her, but she has signed a 14 month lease that she can't pay for without his help. He stops deposited money in a bank account he set up for her (stupid - cash only).

She sends a "highlight reel" to his private email address and merely says the following; "I thought you enjoyed seeing me. You've put me into a terrible position. I thought you cared about me. Without your help I'm going to have to break my lease, mess up u my credit. It will probably mess me up with school. You were the one that insisted I get this expensive apartment. You have really hurt me and I didn't think you would do that"

She has not asked for money. Other than the secret video recording - which as I said - there is little and no chance he wants to prosecute, has she broken any laws? She has many other documents which he is aware of, but they haven't been mentioned.

No request for money - just the fear - since she knows everything about him, what else she might do. He is quite wealthy any reall doesn't want a divorce from his already suspicious wife.

Leaving right and wrong out of this, have any laws been broken? This BTW is in Houston, TX.

If he is so wealthy what's 2 grand for a couple of month's to solve a problem? He obviously doesn't have the cajones to fight with her.

[Mr. GPop]

Originally Posted by ftime

Let's assume a SB has been see a SD for over a year. He pays for her apartment for $1,900 a month to see her for part of the day and spend the night twice a month. He is from another state ( happens to be a community property state). He's married and his wife finds a pair a girls underwear in his suitcase and gets "upset". For the record didn't belong to the SB in question. After that, although he continues his relation, He is acting weird etc.

She begins to record their sexual meetings with a hidden camera with a time stamp on it. I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is since it's without his consent, she's broken some law. My guess is that the last thing in the world he wants to do is prosecute her for that.

He decides he shouldn't see her, but she has signed a 14 month lease that she can't pay for without his help. He stops deposited money in a bank account he set up for her (stupid - cash only).

She sends a "highlight reel" to his private email address and merely says the following; "I thought you enjoyed seeing me. You've put me into a terrible position. I thought you cared about me. Without your help I'm going to have to break my lease, mess up u my credit. It will probably mess me up with school. You were the one that insisted I get this expensive apartment. You have really hurt me and I didn't think you would do that"

She has not asked for money. Other than the secret video recording - which as I said - there is little and no chance he wants to prosecute, has she broken any laws? She has many other documents which he is aware of, but they haven't been mentioned.

No request for money - just the fear - since she knows everything about him, what else she might do. He is quite wealthy any reall doesn't want a divorce from his already suspicious wife.

Leaving right and wrong out of this, have any laws been broken? This BTW is in Houston, TX.

Note the the RED words. She is not DIRECTLY asking for money to be put in her hands, she IS in fact asking that HE PAY for her apartment. Which if I am correct is the same thing. ( I am sure we have some lawyers in here who can chime in) but blackmail/extortion is when you ask for something of value from someone via threat of exposing something etc..

She recorded him without his knowledge but the place is in her name so she can do that without his consent. Once she made the threat of exposing him she committed extortion. He should report her to the cops, let them deal with it, yes he outs himself further but from your post he is already past that point so may as well get a criminal conviction on his SB for extortion. Then he can tell her "Gee.. a black spot on your credit is no where NEAR as bad as a felony. "

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Mr. GPop

Note the the RED words. She is not DIRECTLY asking for money to be put in her hands, she IS in fact asking that HE PAY for her apartment. Which if I am correct is the same thing. ( I am sure we have some lawyers in here who can chime in) but blackmail/extortion is when you ask for something of value from someone via threat of exposing something etc..

She recorded him without his knowledge but the place is in her name so she can do that without his consent. Once she made the threat of exposing him she committed extortion. He should report her to the cops, let them deal with it, yes he outs himself further but from your post he is already past that point so may as well get a criminal conviction on his SB for extortion. Then he can tell her "Gee.. a black spot on your credit is no where NEAR as bad as a felony. "

I disagree with you on two points. First, the SB did NOT ask the SD to pay her rent. This is the OP's summary of what the SB said:

"I thought you enjoyed seeing me. You've put me into a terrible position. I thought you cared about me. Without your help I'm going to have to break my lease, mess up u my credit. It will probably mess me up with school. You were the one that insisted I get this expensive apartment. You have really hurt me and I didn't think you would do that."

There is no express request for the payment of rent. The offense of theft (the Texas version of extortion) requires proof of an overt act. There's none here.

Second, you assert: "She recorded him without his knowledge but the place is in her name so she can do that without his consent." That's an inaccurate description of Texas law. Again, as I stated before, recording sex alone isn't a crime under Texas law. Additional conduct is required for it to be an offense.

[EmilyEzzell]

Originally Posted by FoxyNC

The chivalrous thing to do would be to pay her lease off. (or if he actually gave a shit, you know i.e. Cares.)

But chivalry is for ladies who do not resort to half ass extortion/blackmail attempts.

Sorry, have to play devil's advocate here.

Which is the lesser of the two evils here?

The tape coming out, or paying of the sugar baby's lease?
Which is going to "cost" more?

My underlying question in life...
I always ask myself...
"Is the juice worth the squeeze?"

Wish I had better advise...

Foxy

Excellent feedback

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

No, you need to read the statute again. It states that recordings can't be made "with [the] intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of ANY PERSON" (emphasis added). I assume you're a person. There's no exclusion for persons in the video. Masturbation isn't required, only that the recording was made "with [the] intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person."

Originally Posted by sand247

Somedays i'm a person, yes. Got it. That doesn't make much sense. So i'd be safe if I were recording them for my "safety" or for "training purposes"? This is all theoretical, I don't record, nobody needs to see that....ever, but I am curious.

sand, It doesn't make much sense because you aren't an attorney. The law can be too complicated for a novice to interpret correctly. Hiring and attorney is the best way to understand the law.

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I disagree with you on two points. First, the SB did NOT ask the SD to pay her rent. This is the OP's summary of what the SB said:

"I thought you enjoyed seeing me. You've put me into a terrible position. I thought you cared about me. Without your help I'm going to have to break my lease, mess up u my credit. It will probably mess me up with school. You were the one that insisted I get this expensive apartment. You have really hurt me and I didn't think you would do that."

There is no express request for the payment of rent. The offense of theft (the Texas version of extortion) requires proof of an overt act. There's none here.

Second, you assert: "She recorded him without his knowledge but the place is in her name so she can do that without his consent." That's an inaccurate description of Texas law. Again, as I stated before, recording sex alone isn't a crime under Texas law. Additional conduct is required for it to be an offense.

SJ is able to spell out the law for the layman among us. It's just futile to continue to come up with what if's and buts based on layman understanding. Or what makes sense to you or what others opinions back up your opinion of what makes sense. This appears to be a serious matter which should involve hiring an attorney.

To the OP, Wives are smarter than husbands think or want to believe. I would suggest the SD come clean with his wife. She is already suspicious. She is going to find out sooner or later. Better to come from her husband than another woman like the SB. Neither will be easy and will devastate SD's world for a while. I think the suffering he will experience from telling the truth will be easier than the suffering he will experience from being exposed or discovered. Or the waiting and wondering. She knows something, it's just a matter of time.

Heck, The wife may stay and focus her hatred at the other woman. We women can be stupid like that. It is sometimes easier for a wife to put the focus on the other woman rather than her husband. However misplaced her anger may be. It's how she can live with it.

Hiring an attorney and moving forward under legal advice will be the best spent money.

[ShysterJon]

I don't often say this regarding a post by a provider, but Emily's was thoughtful, accurate, and written in perfect English.

[Unique_Carpenter]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I don't often say this regarding a post by a provider, but Emily's was thoughtful, accurate, and written in perfect English.

And in a style that most layman should be able to understand. So another thank you to Emily from the far northen suburbs

An entire weeks worth of entertainment Jon. And another multi popcorn rating.

[ShysterJon]

btw, does everybody understand the OP is a male (I assume) friend of the SB? I didn't realize that 'til the OP told me. I thought the SD posted.

[Unique_Carpenter]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

btw, does everybody understand the OP is a male (I assume) friend of the SB? I didn't realize that 'til the OP told me. I thought the SD posted.

Yes, although your post 2 ends up a bit awkward, still coarsely valid.
For what it's worth, all relationships end sooner or later. Usually by diverging life paths. IMO, advance discussion can save a lot of grief and folks can wish each other well. With abrupt divergence, discussion on fair could be appropriate. Once folks get upset though, well...
Of course some of my atty friends (PI & family law) think I'm a dreamer. But I like my dance card.

[EmilyEzzell]

Thanks for the compliment Shyster and Unique Carpenter. I thought I was typing in French. Hmm

No, I did not realize OP is friend to SB. I assumed OP is a he and either the SD or friend of SD. My posted response was based on my false perception. May I retract my thoughtfulness? lol

I think it is healthy to commiserate and console SB with empathy and help her process it, learn from it and move on. I know the feeling of being wronged but Delving into murky, video tape waters is gonna get dirty. It may feel good but only temporarily.
It will eat at ones soul at some point. Taking the high road is easier said than done for some people. It will backfire now or later.

The Upside is OP has a little video tape law information that he requested.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by EmilyEzzell

Excellent feedback





sand, It doesn't make much sense because you aren't an attorney. The law can be too complicated for a novice to interpret correctly. Hiring and attorney is the best way to understand the law.


SJ is able to spell out the law for the layman among us. It's just futile to continue to come up with what if's and buts based on layman understanding. Or what makes sense to you or what others opinions back up your opinion of what makes sense. This appears to be a serious matter which should involve hiring an attorney.

To the OP, Wives are smarter than husbands think or want to believe. I would suggest the SD come clean with his wife. She is already suspicious. She is going to find out sooner or later. Better to come from her husband than another woman like the SB. Neither will be easy and will devastate SD's world for a while. I think the suffering he will experience from telling the truth will be easier than the suffering he will experience from being exposed or discovered. Or the waiting and wondering. She knows something, it's just a matter of time.

Heck, The wife may stay and focus her hatred at the other woman. We women can be stupid like that. It is sometimes easier for a wife to put the focus on the other woman rather than her husband. However misplaced her anger may be. It's how she can live with it.

Hiring an attorney and moving forward under legal advice will be the best spent money.

While I agree it is a well written post, I disagree with the idea of outing yourself to your wife. It gives her the high moral ground and you years of grief if you stay together, and ammunition for her if you divorce. Better to bluff and prepare for the worst if you get called.

[FoxyNC]

I agree with DSK. I would hope he would have the sense to just pay the lease & keep his head down...
Because if he don't, his ass is gonna be dealing with one hell of a squeeze (from the wife's end) for a LONG ass time.
As far as advising the sugar baby.... I think she has already done enough.
Hopefully she has learned that you don't ever sign YOUR name on some shit you can't afford by your own means.

Sometimes we make our bed, even in ignorance, and have to sleep in it.

Foxy

[Mr. GPop]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I disagree with you on two points. First, the SB did NOT ask the SD to pay her rent. This is the OP's summary of what the SB said:

"I thought you enjoyed seeing me. You've put me into a terrible position. I thought you cared about me. Without your help I'm going to have to break my lease, mess up u my credit. It will probably mess me up with school. You were the one that insisted I get this expensive apartment. You have really hurt me and I didn't think you would do that."

There is no express request for the payment of rent. The offense of theft (the Texas version of extortion) requires proof of an overt act. There's none here.

Second, you assert: "She recorded him without his knowledge but the place is in her name so she can do that without his consent." That's an inaccurate description of Texas law. Again, as I stated before, recording sex alone isn't a crime under Texas law. Additional conduct is required for it to be an offense.

Ok. to clarify something, he might have started paying the rent on his on volition, but now she is bringing up a video recording of their fun and threatens to out him. She wants him to continue to pay or that recording might be exposed.

By her own words she admitted to making the recording, she has sent a "highlight reel" of their fun so she has made a threat of extortion in guise of "pay my rent or else" (she is demanding something of value in exchange for her NOT releasing the video)

she and he do not live in the same state so that might add some legal issues since a veiled threat was made to him across state lines.

I stand corrected on the recording, though its her place she admitted to recording him with out his consent, and being corrected in my assumption that she could do that without his consent or at least signs posted saying that all activities are recorded, has she violated a law now?

all this adds up to her "intent" to blackmail him into continuing paying for her apartment. The advice of "pay it off and move on" to me is BAD because once the lease ends, do you think she won't mention this BS again to get it renewed?

She has tipped her hand, use it against her, involve the legal people in the form of cops, lawyers etc... see if she can pay for her own legal defense. The guy has admitted to his wife finding a pair of girls underwear and is "upset" What makes you think she will forgive him or do you think she is now suspicious?

Bust her chops, expose her, let her get into legal trouble so that if she tries it again, she faces bigger fines/jail time. very least it stops.

We see it in the forums about hookers robbing clients etc.. and WE OUT THEM / POST WARNINGS about them!!! how is this different?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Mr. GPop

Ok. to clarify something, he might have started paying the rent on his on volition, but now she is bringing up a video recording of their fun and threatens to out him. She wants him to continue to pay or that recording might be exposed.

By her own words she admitted to making the recording, she has sent a "highlight reel" of their fun so she has made a threat of extortion in guise of "pay my rent or else" (she is demanding something of value in exchange for her NOT releasing the video)

Where in the world do you get all that from? It's not in the OP's fact pattern.

Again, establishing the offense of theft (Texas' version of extortion) requires proof of one or more OVERT ACTS. WHERE IS THE OVERT ACT HERE? EITHER DEAL WITH THIS OR STFU. DON'T JUST KEEP REPEATING YOUR ARGUMENT.

Can I be any clearer?

[sand247]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

You've used up your allowance of free answers to silly questions.

Thank you good sir. They were good answers and appreciated. Although I have no SO and therefore would not have issues with this, it has been an interesting read. I did not infer that anyone but the SD posted this. Still interesting.