Quote:
Originally Posted by ShysterJon
That's very unlikely, in my view. The original hypothetical assumes the husband was faithful; therefore, there can't be any credible evidence he was unfaithful. If the wife merely asserts her husband cheated, without explaining the basis of her belief, that would not been enough to get character or prior bad acts evidence admitted at trial.
|
I think this is actually going to be a state-by-state issue. Some places - NY comes to mind - will probably allow it in if there were other circumstantial evidence to support it (e.g. - he stays in a lot of hotel rooms, unexplained cash expenditures, etc.). I agree that you've got a problem if the past behavior is all you have, but if there's something else to go with it I think you can argue for admission.
IIRC, the NY courts tend to be lenient of prior bad act evidence when the act to be proved is one normally concealed (adultery, fraud, embezzlement, etc.). In some jurisdictions you'd have a shot.
The place where I think you'd definitely see it admitted is when child custody is involved. I can't imagine a court not considering a history of such behavior when looking at the kids.
Didn't Denise Richards get in the Heidi Fleiss link against Charlie Sheen?
Cheers,
Mazo.