E-mails as evidence, if not between parties

[killerzoey]

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


If one party has e-mails by the other party that weren't sent to them, can they be used as evidence if they were obtained legally (other party gave password)?

They may be very useful in illuminating the other party's perspective on life and true priorities (as opposed to what his lawyer is telling him to say are his priorities).

The other question is, even if they are admissible, are they also frowned upon because they indicate snooping?

 

[Zigner]

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


If one party has e-mails by the other party that weren't sent to them, can they be used as evidence if they were obtained legally (other party gave password)?

They may be very useful in illuminating the other party's perspective on life and true priorities (as opposed to what his lawyer is telling him to say are his priorities).

The other question is, even if they are admissible, are they also frowned upon because they indicate snooping?

Don't count on any weight being given to the emails.

 

[killerzoey]

Don't count on any weight being given to the emails.

Why? Not being combative, just curious.

They're pretty brazen and extreme. And there are many.

 

[Zigner]

Why? Not being combative, just curious.

They're pretty brazen and extreme. And there are many.

First of all - you can't even PROVE that they came from the other party.

Second - it can be EASILY argued that the emails were taken totally out of context...

 

[Ohiogal]

It can also be argued -- and what I would argue -- is if you logged into the account then you could have sent the emails purportedly FROM the other party that makes them look brazen and horrid.

However if you can get the other party to admit that they did write the emails then that authenticates them.

 

[Zigner]

It can also be argued -- and what I would argue -- is if you logged into the account then you could have sent the emails purportedly FROM the other party that makes them look brazen and horrid.

However if you can get the other party to admit that they did write the emails then that authenticates them.

Yes, that would be true...but if the other party would admit to that, then the emails wouldn't be needed in the first place

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

If you have the password, who's to say that you didn't write the emails? And you weren't a party to them, so they aren't your "property" to have. Both are arguments I would give against them.

First of all - you can't even PROVE that they came from the other party.

Second - it can be EASILY argued that the emails were taken totally out of context...

Ah, it's nice to have an ex who will freely admit to what she wrote...

 

[killerzoey]

If you have the password, who's to say that you didn't write the emails? And you weren't a party to them, so they aren't your "property" to have. Both are arguments I would give against them.


Ah, it's nice to have an ex who will freely admit to what she wrote...

This may be just such a STBX. Because he probably wouldn't see anything wrong with what he wrote because he wrote it and therefore it is ok.

He wouldn't necessarily say these things in court as he tends to write in a way that is different from his speech. But if asked if he wrote them he would possibly say yes.

Of course, to prevent him from saying things like that is what he has an attorney for.

 

[Ohiogal]

This may be just such a STBX. Because he probably wouldn't see anything wrong with what he wrote because he wrote it and therefore it is ok.

Of course that's what he has an attorney for.

And that is what is going to be your biggest issue. Because I would fight to keep them out or discredit you so badly for having them. I would bring up everything I could to destroy your credibility? Ever cheat on a boyfriend? Lie to your ex about anything and he caught you? Lie to anyone in front of your ex or that he knows of? Did you ever not claim all of your tips or anything else that was not 100% aboveboard? See where this is going? If your ex knows about it, assume his attorney knows about it. Your credibility is going to be an issue that can be attacked. So what can they attack it with? Did you ever write an email from his account? What did you do with his account? Why did you have his password?

 

[killerzoey]

And that is what is going to be your biggest issue. Because I would fight to keep them out or discredit you so badly for having them. I would bring up everything I could to destroy your credibility? Ever cheat on a boyfriend? Lie to your ex about anything and he caught you? Lie to anyone in front of your ex or that he knows of? Did you ever not claim all of your tips or anything else that was not 100% aboveboard? See where this is going? If your ex knows about it, assume his attorney knows about it. Your credibility is going to be an issue that can be attacked. So what can they attack it with? Did you ever write an email from his account? What did you do with his account? Why did you have his password?

I see. This is why I am asking. Of course he has dirt like that on me. I would assume that is going to be brought up anyway, though. He is already heading that direction. He has declared "war".

Yes I did write e-mails from his account. Twice, years ago. Scanned documents and sent them for him, but of course not AS him.

I had his password for this reason and because if I needed an e-mail address he would tell me to just go get it. He was pretty open-door about it. Not that he might admit that now.
=

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

I see. This is why I am asking. Of course he has dirt like that on me. I would assume that is going to be brought up anyway, though. He is already heading that direction. He has declared "war".

Yes I did write e-mails from his account. Twice, years ago. Scanned documents and sent them for him, but of course not AS him.

I had his password for this reason and because if I needed an e-mail address he would tell me to just go get it. He was pretty open-door about it. Not that he might admit that now.
=

So, you admit that you have sent emails from this email account in the past, and that Dad KNOWS that you have access to said account, and you really expect the court to believe that Dad left emails that, if real, would provide evidence to you of his "perspective on life and true priorities"?

The above is exactly what you can expect Dad's lawyer to say.

Besides, Dad can have whatever "perspective on life and true priorities" that he wants, as long as it's not harmful to the children...

 

[killerzoey]

So, you admit that you have sent emails from this email account in the past, and that Dad KNOWS that you have access to said account, and you really expect the court to believe that Dad left emails that, if real, would provide evidence to you of his "perspective on life and true priorities"?

The above is exactly what you can expect Dad's lawyer to say.

Besides, Dad can have whatever "perspective on life and true priorities" that he wants, as long as it's not harmful to the children...

That would be a good argument, the "why would he possibly leave them" argument. No one expects a person to be that out in the ether, though he is.

His perspective/priorities are potentially harmful in an indirect way. He is claiming a level of concern and involvement that is disingenuous and mostly for the benefit of decreased child support. The e-mails show that all that matters to him is HIM HIM HIM and his blessed freedom.

They also show that during a period of time when he was only seeing the children infrequently (but now claims he wanted more time with the children but was "allowing" me my space) that in reality he was delighted with his life because he could surf all the time and see the kids whenever he wanted. That's what he wrote at the time.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

That would be a good argument, the "why would he possibly leave them" argument. No one expects a person to be that out in the ether, though he is.

His perspective/priorities are potentially harmful in an indirect way. He is claiming a level of concern and involvement that is disingenuous and mostly for the benefit of decreased child support. The e-mails show that all that matters to him is HIM HIM HIM and his blessed freedom.

They also show that during a period of time when he was claiming to want more time with the children (but "allowing" me my space) that in reality he was as happy as a pig in caca because he could surf all the time and see the kids whenever he wanted.

You know what? You're right. Go ahead and use them. You have him dead to rights...

 

[killerzoey]

You know what? You're right. Go ahead and use them. You have him dead to rights...

Are you being facetious? Sorry - hard to tell online sometimes.

 

[Isis1]

Are you being facetious? Sorry - hard to tell online sometimes.

yes, he was....