# Man indicted after catching his wife cheating



## Jus260 (Mar 24, 2016)

This man is an American Hero.

I caught my wife sleeping with her boss ? and now I might end up in jail | New York Post

If this goes to trial, hopefully there are lots of betrayed spouses on the jury


----------



## Tatsuhiko (Jun 21, 2016)

I like that it's all documented in the media so that the kids can know the truth about their mom when they're old enough. The Internet is forever. Our hero might have the last laugh.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Jus260 said:


> This man is an American Hero.


No, this man is.


----------



## lucy999 (Sep 28, 2014)

What happened was horrific but he should have never walked into a house that wasn't his!


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

*No prosecutor in their right mind is going to want to prosecute this case! The DA damn sure won't represent the County, and will probably be pawning it off on some recent inexperienced law school graduate in his office!

Since this is now a criminal case, the legal standard is now "beyond a reasonable doubt!" The fun thing is that both of the adulterers will be subpoenaed by the State to testify in its behalf! Defense attorneys would outbid and literally climb over each other in order to get to cross-examine this lurid duo. 

Everything, all of the minute details, about their little adulterous affair, more especially that same day, is totally relevant and subject to painstaking query by the defense! Their sweat will drop sweat! This is absolutely a defense attorneys dream!

Add to this that there is no way in hell that 12 sane jurors would ever agree to convict! The money used to prosecute this case comes out of the DA's budget!*


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

He was lucky he wasn't shot.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

Andy1001 said:


> He was lucky he wasn't shot.


Nah, he caught the other guy about to shoot alright, but it wasn't a gun and it wasn't aimed at him. Not many guys can quickly transition from shooting their load to shooting an actual weapon.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

How many threads are there going to be on this same story?


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

Andy1001 said:


> He was lucky he wasn't shot.


*Yeah! The only one who would have been in the real line of fire would be his wife! 

And that was because she had placed herself there to be "shot," by simply removing her panties and then inviting her paramour to just aim somewhere between her thighs!*


----------



## VladDracul (Jun 17, 2016)

Andy1001 said:


> He was lucky he wasn't shot.


Right. You can't even go, uninvited, into another man's house to retrieve your dog.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

VladDracul said:


> Right. You can't even go, uninvited, into another man's house to retrieve your dog.


Well he was trying to retrieve his *****.😈


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Andy1001 said:


> Well he was trying to retrieve his *****.😈


----------



## TJW (Mar 20, 2012)

arbitrator said:


> there is no way in hell that 12 sane jurors would ever agree to convict! The money used to prosecute this case comes out of the DA's budget!


If they actually do take this to trial, I hope they become the laughing stock of the whole ****ing world.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

TJW said:


> If they actually do take this to trial, I hope they become the laughing stock of the whole ****ing world.


There is such a thing as "justifiable homicide," but the threshold for deciding a killing is not a criminal offense is pretty high. Logically, it would follow that the threshold for justifiable trespassing should be a lot lower.


----------



## TJW (Mar 20, 2012)

If I were a juror, my deliberation on whether this met the "justifiable" threshold would require at least 3 seconds.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

TJW said:


> If they actually do take this to trial, I hope they become the laughing stock of the whole ****ing world.


*You already have an indictment by a grand jury that is sitting on the table! Given that, there are only three avenues open to the DA: (1) Try the case, and likely assign it to a young subordinate prosecutor, who would stand no chance at winning, (2) go back to the grand jury who true-billed the indictment, and ask them to reconsider the case and present a "no bill!", or (3) go before the judge trying the case and ask the case to be dismissed ~ but doing so could infuriate the grand jury and the judge presiding over it!*


----------



## Jus260 (Mar 24, 2016)

Blondilocks said:


> How many threads are there going to be on this same story?


I apologize for not bumping the other thread. I didn't realize this had been posted. I'm not a message board super user. I'm not here everyday.


----------



## sissyphus (Feb 1, 2012)

Don't you have to steal something to classify it as a burglary? wouldn't this just be considered trespassing?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

sissyphus said:


> Don't you have to steal something to classify it as a burglary? wouldn't this just be considered trespassing?


Correct.
But keep in mind, in most states, criminal treasspass is still a felony.


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

Well, this is the post, so who knows how accurate it is. Mostly, of this is his story, the guy is lying. He activated find my phone on the kids ipad? Unless he pays for a cellular service on it (which I doubt) it would not have shown any location as it would have been off the network.

He was hunting for his wife and I am sure that makes him seem a little less innocent in his eyes if he said he was tracking her. Either way, it's pretty crazy this guy is prosecuting him solely for this. I mean, he had to have trashed the house or something.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Herschel said:


> Well, this is the post, so who knows how accurate it is. Mostly, of this is his story, the guy is lying. He activated find my phone on the kids ipad? *Unless he pays for a cellular service on it* (which I doubt) it would not have shown any location as it would have been off the network.
> 
> He was hunting for his wife and I am sure that makes him seem a little less innocent in his eyes if he said he was tracking her. Either way, it's pretty crazy this guy is prosecuting him solely for this. I mean, he had to have trashed the house or something.


Totally believable, especially since a) the service (on Verizon) is only $10/mo and b) providers typically offer significant discounts on the devices in order to get people to purchase the service.

Either way, if that's not the case, that will be the very first hole poked in his story by the prosecutor.


----------



## Jus260 (Mar 24, 2016)

Herschel said:


> Well, this is the post, so who knows how accurate it is. Mostly, of this is his story, the guy is lying. He activated find my phone on the kids ipad? Unless he pays for a cellular service on it (which I doubt) it would not have shown any location as it would have been off the network.
> 
> He was hunting for his wife and I am sure that makes him seem a little less innocent in his eyes if he said he was tracking her. Either way, it's pretty crazy this guy is prosecuting him solely for this. I mean, he had to have trashed the house or something.





GusPolinski said:


> Totally believable, especially since a) the service (on Verizon) is only $10/mo and b) providers typically offer significant discounts on the devices in order to get people to purchase the service.
> 
> Either way, if that's not the case, that will be the very first hole poked in his story by the prosecutor.



My wife has an iPhone and an Apple watch. My daughter has my wife's old iPhone that isn't connected to a data plan. It's Wi-Fi only. We have three ipads that are Wi-Fi only. All of the Apple devices are on my wife's iTunes account. 

They all have the find my phone app. I can open the find my phone app on any iPad in the house. It will bring up the location of every device on her iTunes account if it is connected to the internet through Wi-Fi or 4G. None of our ipads have cellular capability even if I wanted to add it as a feature. I don't have any problem locating our devices.


----------



## doobie (Apr 15, 2014)

Tatsuhiko said:


> I like that it's all documented in the media so that the kids can know the truth about their mom when they're old enough. The Internet is forever. Our hero might have the last laugh.


My sympathies lie with this guy and, in my opinion, he can't be done for felony burglary - he didn't steal anything and the front door was open. I'm rather disturbed by the number of people who've said he's lucky he didn't get shot. Eeeek! That's quite a cultural shock for me as I'm from the UK, not the US. In the UK, we're not generally at risk of being randomly shot because our firearms laws are very different than those in the UK (of which I'm really thankful).

My major concern is about the post that I've quoted. While it might seem sublime irony that the kids can know the truth about their mother, is that really a good thing from the point of view of the kids? My parents' marriage began to fall apart when I was in my early teens and they both had affairs (this was at a time when divorce wasn't socially acceptable in the UK, a situation which has changed) which we kids were aware of because they argued about them all the time. The shame that this brought on us as a family was particularly damaging to all of us, one of my sisters in particular has suffered immensely from this and is an alcoholic with an absolute train-wreck of a life. I found it terribly upsetting knowing about my parents' affairs during my formative years and it had a really detrimental effect on my ability to form good relationships when I grew up. 

I have nothing against social media, indeed, I welcome the connections it allows us these days and I acutally work as a social media manager for one of my clients. However, I do feel that social media is just that - social - not personal. I post on social media quite a lot, but would never post anything really personal or intimate, I just think that would be inappropriate. I worry about this guy's kids seeing stuff about their mother on social media and the long-term damage that's likely to do to them. I do home this case is thrown out of court though as I can't see that the guy has done anything wrong here.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

doobie said:


> My sympathies lie with this guy and, in my opinion, he can't be done for felony burglary - he didn't steal anything and the front door was open.


Even criminal trespassing is a felony in most jurisdictions. That the door was unlocked is irrelevant. Any time you enter another's home without permission, it is criminal tresspass. 

But I also sympathize with this guy and, if on a jury, would likely vote to acquit based on his action being justified under the circumstances.


----------



## Jus260 (Mar 24, 2016)

His defense is he followed his wife to the house. He heard her screaming. He entered the house to figure out what the hell was going on. #ReasonableDoubt
#NotGuilty


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Jus260 said:


> His defense is he followed his wife to the house. *He heard her screaming. *He entered the house to figure out what the hell was going on. #ReasonableDoubt
> #NotGuilty


:lol: :rofl:


----------

