extortion in divorce?

[Confused Tx Dad]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

When my wife and I separated last summer, quoted from the audio I recorded, "we can do this the easy way or the hard way. The easy way is for you to accept $25,000 cash and get your kids everyother weekend and Wednesdays. If you don't want to go along with that, that little incident you told me 2 years ago about your dad [regarding an alleged child abuse incident in 1977] will be thoroughly investigated and he will be sent to prison".

Will this bite her in the rear?! Is my audio recording of this admissable?

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

When my wife and I separated last summer, quoted from the audio I recorded, "we can do this the easy way or the hard way. The easy way is for you to accept $25,000 cash and get your kids everyother weekend and Wednesdays. If you don't want to go along with that, that little incident you told me 2 years ago about your dad [regarding an alleged child abuse incident in 1977] will be thoroughly investigated and he will be sent to prison".

Will this bite her in the rear?! Is my audio recording of this admissable?

Assuming that she's also in TX, you're OK with the recording because TX is a one party consent state. If she's out of state, there might be different laws about recording across state lines.

Whether it will bite her in court depends on a large number of factors. Among them:
1. Whether she actually tries to do anything once it's in front of a judge
2. What action she takes. She could presumably go to a child welfare group based on what you told her, but she would not be able to testify in court (hearsay).
3. Whether a child welfare group would get involved in a case that's over 20 years old.


I would strongly encourage you to speak with an attorney. In my experience, bluster sometimes goes away pretty quickly when faced with an aggressive attorney. OTOH, your attorney may tell you that what she's offering is reasonable and not worth fighting about - even if she was not threatening your father.

It is, unfortunately, a very common situation where one party makes threats like that. Fortunately, in MOST cases, things eventually get resolved without the person following through on their threats.

 

[Ohiogal]

Assuming that she's also in TX, you're OK with the recording because TX is a one party consent state. If she's out of state, there might be different laws about recording across state lines.

Whether it will bite her in court depends on a large number of factors. Among them:
1. Whether she actually tries to do anything once it's in front of a judge
2. What action she takes. She could presumably go to a child welfare group based on what you told her, but she would not be able to testify in court (hearsay).
3. Whether a child welfare group would get involved in a case that's over 20 years old.


I would strongly encourage you to speak with an attorney. In my experience, bluster sometimes goes away pretty quickly when faced with an aggressive attorney. OTOH, your attorney may tell you that what she's offering is reasonable and not worth fighting about - even if she was not threatening your father.

It is, unfortunately, a very common situation where one party makes threats like that. Fortunately, in MOST cases, things eventually get resolved without the person following through on their threats.

Child abuse is a crime. In most states the SOL does not begin to toll until the child reaches the age of 18. And then it depends on the nature of the abuse as to how long the statute of limitations lasts. And no it is not extortion. Your father abusing a child could be used against you for custody -- especially if YOU are close to your father. A restraining order could be entered against him possibly. But if she knew about it and then permitted the children to be around him she loses on that argument.

ETA: I would fight it if I were you.

 

[mistoffolees]

Child abuse is a crime. In most states the SOL does not begin to toll until the child reaches the age of 18.

The incident allegedly happened in 1977. Even if the child was a newborn, he/she would be 22 now, probably older than that. SOL for child abuse is 10 years in TX, so if the child was born earlier than 1971 (that is, older than 6 at the time of the incident), the SOL has run out, anyway.

There is, undoubtedly, more to the story. It was an 'alleged child abuse incident' in 1977. Was he charged and then found not guilty? Then there's nothing she can do. If he was not formally charged, then he could be charged later.

 

[Confused Tx Dad]

Your father abusing a child could be used against you for custody -- especially if YOU are close to your father. A restraining order could be entered against him possibly. But if she knew about it and then permitted the children to be around him she loses on that argument.

ETA: I would fight it if I were you.

You just explained why, in her deposition when she was asked, she first denied offering me $$ but then explained that she only knew that my father had done "something so horrific that there's no SOL", but claimed she didn't know what it was.

 

[Confused Tx Dad]

There is, undoubtedly, more to the story. It was an 'alleged child abuse incident' in 1977. Was he charged and then found not guilty? Then there's nothing she can do. If he was not formally charged, then he could be charged later.

nothing had ever been mentioned about this until 3 yrs ago when my sister told me about it. She never told anyone else.

 

[Proserpina]

The incident allegedly happened in 1977. Even if the child was a newborn, he/she would be 22 now, probably older than that. SOL for child abuse is 10 years in TX, so if the child was born earlier than 1971 (that is, older than 6 at the time of the incident), the SOL has run out, anyway.

There is, undoubtedly, more to the story. It was an 'alleged child abuse incident' in 1977. Was he charged and then found not guilty? Then there's nothing she can do. If he was not formally charged, then he could be charged later.

Um...he'd be 32, surely?

 

[Isis1]

Um...he'd be 32, surely?

that's what i was thinking. i know my math is bad...but i was born in 77. and i'm pretty sure i'm 32....course the ex still thinks i'm 21

 

[mistoffolees]

Um...he'd be 32, surely?

My bad. YOu're right, of course. Late flight back from Boston last night.

So the SOL is expired on anything related to child abuse.

There are crimes in TX for which there is no SOL:
"(A) murder and manslaughter;

(B) sexual assault, if during the investigation of the offense biological matter is collected and subjected to forensic DNA testing and the testing results show that the matter does not match the victim or any other person whose identity is readily ascertained; or

(C) an offense involving leaving the scene of an accident under Section 550.021, Transportation Code, if the accident resulted in the death of a person; "

The only one that could apply in this case is B, but only if they collected biological matter at the time - which doesn't seem likely.

 

[mistoffolees]

You just explained why, in her deposition when she was asked, she first denied offering me $$ but then explained that she only knew that my father had done "something so horrific that there's no SOL", but claimed she didn't know what it was.

Definitely fight it. If she now tries to accuse your father of something, then you pull out her deposition and ask why she's perjuring herself.

The only things for which there is no SOL in TX are listed in the above post. Unless they collected biological evidence against your father, none of them apply. And since your stbx clearly would have no way of knowing that, she's blowing smoke.

Don't take legal advice from a stbx.

 

[Ohiogal]

The incident allegedly happened in 1977. Even if the child was a newborn, he/she would be 22 now, probably older than that. SOL for child abuse is 10 years in TX, so if the child was born earlier than 1971 (that is, older than 6 at the time of the incident), the SOL has run out, anyway.

There is, undoubtedly, more to the story. It was an 'alleged child abuse incident' in 1977. Was he charged and then found not guilty? Then there's nothing she can do. If he was not formally charged, then he could be charged later.

Psst... By my math the child would be 32. Or is this that newfangled new math that I never got learned.

 

[Proserpina]

Psst... By my math the child would be 32. Or is this that newfangled new math that I never got learned.

Ah, you must be referring to Fuzzy Math - the bane of ...well, nobody, really, unless your last name happens to rhyme with Mush

 

[Bali Hai]

My bad. YOu're right, of course. Late flight back from Boston last night.

So the SOL is expired on anything related to child abuse.

There are crimes in TX for which there is no SOL:
"(A) murder and manslaughter;

(B) sexual assault, if during the investigation of the offense biological matter is collected and subjected to forensic DNA testing and the testing results show that the matter does not match the victim or any other person whose identity is readily ascertained; or

(C) an offense involving leaving the scene of an accident under Section 550.021, Transportation Code, if the accident resulted in the death of a person; "

The only one that could apply in this case is B, but only if they collected biological matter at the time - which doesn't seem likely.

It's not the first time, nor the last, that you head was in the clouds.

 

[mistoffolees]

It's not the first time, nor the last, that you head was in the clouds.

Better that than a head full of clouds....