Hypothetical SD/SB issue

[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.

[ShysterJon]

Pay the bitch off and move on.

[chipjeep]

I agree with Jon. Regardless of any legalities here, there is potential for great ugliness. Sounds like money shouldn't be an issue here so why not agree on some sort of severance package that would allow her time to find another SD?

[Tetas]

Pay her off but put the fear of God into her.
Lay out some proof that you'll prosecute for black-mail or she may just see how easy it was and come back for more.

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by riday

Pay her off but put the fear of God into her.
Lay out some proof that you'll prosecute for black-mail or she may just see how easy it was and come back for more.

I completely disagree. Never make a threat you aren't willing to carry out. For reasons he explained, the OP would never go to the police if the girl tried to blackmail him.

I think a far better approach would be to have a written settlement agreement. A cunning lawyer could write one that's binding.

[Gotyour6]

I would tell her to fuck off and send her the definition of extortion.

I only had one that tried that bullshit with me.

I am lucky though because my wife knows, she went through with it and now she is in jail. (I am sure she is out now but you get my point)

You want your relationship to end with the wife do nothing, or pay her off or call her bluff.

[junglemonkey]

That my friends is why you have alter egos and pay with cash. Have a 2nd phone, 2nd email, and never pay for her shit with debit or credit. Or at least by reload able debit card from CVS.

[sand247]

Baby jesus, i'm surprised a man that got that far could be that dull. No cutout, no buffer, BANK ACCOUNT? To the original question, blackmail/extortion is illegal, but there were no "demands", and it's illegal to record sex acts without consent, but again no prosection wanted. So on the surface, yes laws were broken, on the whole, he's fucked.

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by sand247

... it's illegal to record sex acts without consent...

No, it's not, under Texas law. There must be more than merely an unconsented recording:

TEXAS PENAL CODE, Sec. 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING.

(a) In this section, "promote" has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.*
(b) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is not a bathroom or private dressing room:
(A) without the other person's consent; and
(B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;
(2) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is a bathroom or private dressing room:
(A) without the other person's consent; and
(B) with intent to:
(i) invade the privacy of the other person; or
(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or
(3) knowing the character and content of the photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission, promotes a photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission described by Subdivision (1) or (2).
(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.(e) For purposes of Subsection (b)(2), a sign or signs posted indicating that the person is being photographed or that a visual image of the person is being recorded, broadcast, or transmitted is not sufficient to establish the person's consent under that subdivision.

See Texas Penal Code, Sec. 21.15.

*"'Promote' means to manufacture, issue, sell, give, provide, lend, mail, deliver, transfer, transmit, publish, distribute, circulate, disseminate, present, exhibit, or advertise, or to offer or agree to do the same."

The Texas Penal Code doesn't speak in terms of 'extortion' or 'blackmail'; rather, when a person threatens to do something or not do something to get money from the complaining witness (aka 'victim'), it's theft under Texas law. 'Theft' is unlawfully appropriating property with the intent to deprive the owner of the property.

[Guest020216]

I get that the girl is upset about it... But it is usually pretty easy to find a way to legally break a lease that wouldn't mess with her credit. It would also keep her some implying a threat against the man in question.

And how hard would it be for her to find another SD? If she is good enough to land a $1900 a month apartment with one.. can't she just find another?

[sand247]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

No, it's not, under Texas law. There must be more than merely an unconsented recording:

OK, i'll buy that. Not being a lawyer I did not read that correctly.

So, I can record my sessions with women with impunity. As long as I don't jerk off to them later? Or that's allowed since i'm in them, but I can't send one to my buddy to rub one out with? I can't sell them, or try do deprive the person in them of property (money).

[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

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by sand247

So, I can record my sessions with women with impunity. As long as I don't jerk off to them later? Or that's allowed since i'm in them, but I can't send one to my buddy to rub one out with? I can't sell them, or try do deprive the person in them of property (money).

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."

[sand247]

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."

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.

[ShysterJon]

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