"Cheating, Snooping, and Felonious Conduct," by Alpha Unit

A horrible crime has occurred in the state of Michigan. You may have heard by now. But the people of Michigan need not fear: a prosecutorial posse is pursuing this criminal with vigor. A 33-year-old man who suspected his wife of cheating got into her e-mail account, using a password that he says she kept in a book next to the computer. A computer that the couple shared. Leon Walker says he had no choice but to snoop in his wife’s account. He cites concern for the couple’s child, whom he didn’t want around the man he suspected of being her lover. His suspicions were confirmed, apparently. The couple’s subsequent divorce became final this month. But the state of Michigan isn’t done with Walker. He’s been charged with unauthorized access to a computer in order to “acquire, alter, damage, delete, or destroy property.” The law is typically used to prosecute people for identity theft or for stealing trade secrets. Walker could possibly serve five years in prison. At question is whether a spouse can expect privacy on a jointly owned computer. Walker’s attorney says no. Furthermore, he says:

If there’s going to be a concerted effort in the future to prosecute everybody who looks at somebody else’s e-mail under their roof, they had better build a bunch more courthouses because we don’t have enough courthouses.

I’ve heard some people raise the question: if a wife had gotten into her husband’s e-mail account and confirmed that he was cheating, would the state be going after her? Probably, if someone thought an example should be made of her, I’m guessing. That’s what seems to be happening here. Mrs. Walker filed a complaint about her husband’s actions, according to the prosecutor. If a man were similarly caught, would he complain about his wife getting a hold of his e-mails? Or would he do as expected and “take it like a man”?

Please follow and like us:

0 thoughts on “"Cheating, Snooping, and Felonious Conduct," by Alpha Unit”

  1. Can you say “DOUBLE STANDARD”? Yes, they exist… are real… and this is one of them. She would be writing a book and doing the talk show circuit.

  2. Welcome to the emerging police state, folks. It won’t be long before your trusted “big three” can be hauled on stage in your very own “monkey trial.” Namely, your Spouse, Priest and Lawyer.
    In this case, it sounds to me like she had bad-ass legal council, and he didn’t. She could not have known how to game the system in this manor, all on her own. Her attorney had connections at the D.A, and someone in the chain had the notion to test this legal angle out.
    Sad part is, if he is relying on a “public pretender” in this case, he is fucked. He might not do time, but he will lose, and there will be no appeal to a higher court. On the grounds that they were a married couple at the time, and hence this law clearly was not meant for this kind of situation.
    If he were in California, I’d say plead “no-contest,” and take a slap on the wrist. A slap that will, of course, be used in the standing of his rights to the custody of his children, not doubt. Probably the original intent to begin with all along.
    Now, how’s that for a theory? 😀

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)