247
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
247 points (98.1% liked)
Not The Onion
22404 readers
166 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm not disagreeing with you or justifying his actions. Just presenting the other side of the argument.
I'm curious though. How would you propose he catch her cheating, including proof beyond reasonable doubt, that would guarantee a similar settlement or better?
In the end, he got a nice settlement, but had to pay back a little less than a 3rd of it back for the recording. Sounds mostly fair, though I'd make it maybe a 5th or less instead of a 3rd.
If there is a start recording button there is a stop recording button, he could have tried to avoid filming during sex perhaps. Maybe there are other camera's in the house, or a video doorbell.. but generally I agree on this: it will be his word against her without any proof, the proof won't be proof when they're just in the same house at the same time. What's also weird if he would have entered the house and caught them having sex he wouldn't have invaded her privacy. If I were him i'd be upset I had to pay money but relieved to be receiving some and if i were her i'd be upset I had to pay money but relieved it could've been worse.