Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
^She destroys your stuff over leaving her at home but she's going to be reasonable on custody and visitation? Think, man.
^She destroys your stuff over leaving her at home but she's going to be reasonable on custody and visitation? Think, man.
Good advice.Start carrying around aVARwhen at home. It's really, really cheap insurance against a world of trouble in the future.
Not while she's going nuts no. When she calms down I think it'll be a good chance.She starts breaking your stuff like a little child taking their ball home.. I don't think she'll settle for the easy thing you have drawn up
Time will tell, until then I'll follow the path my lawyer has set for me.I've seen otherwise sensible and reasonable women act completely irrationally and unreasonable when it comes to divorce proceedings. I can't imagine a certified psycho.
Just tell her: "I'm going to be recording everything you say from now on", whilst recording and getting her to acknowledge that.EDIT: I've been told any recordings without her knowledge wont be allowed to be used.
She has to consent...I could possibly fit it into another argument when one happens and she'll brush it off and say she doesn't care. It's an idea...I'll run it by the guy who knows more about this stuff than I do.Just tell her: "I'm going to be recording everything you say from now on", whilst recording and getting her to acknowledge that.
Probably a good idea. I would however like to hear the conversation with your lawyer if you decide to take rerolled's advice. "No sir I thought your idea was bad and a bunch of idiots on the internet told me to do something else so I did that."Time will tell, until then I'll follow the path my lawyer has set for me.
That's what I was thinking as well but it's worth looking into.If she agrees to it during an argument would that be considered 'under duress' ?
There's no argument, if she doesn't consent they are thrown out.Better to have the recordings and argue about admissibility later than to not have them and definitely lose.
Thats just wrong. Minnesota wiretap statutes allow a party to a conversation to record that conversation.There's no argument, if she doesn't consent they are thrown out.
(d) It is not unlawful under this chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communicationwhere such person is a party to the communicationor where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the United States or of any state.
One-party consent (yours) is fine to record. Record away, sir.The statutes provide that any person who intentionally intercepts an oral communication is subject to liability. Minn.Stat. ? 626A.02, subd. 1(a); 18 U.S.C. ? 2511(1)(a). A party to the conversation is exempted from liability, however, unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act. Minn.Stat. ? 626A.02, subd. 2(d); 18 U.S.C. ? 2511(2)(d). The burden of proof is on the party attempting to show that the communication was intercepted for criminal or tortious purposes.
Are divorce proceedings covered under tort law? Is there a tortfeasor?Thats just wrong. Minnesota wiretap statutes allow a party to a conversation to record that conversation.
626A.02 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes
One-party consent (yours) is fine to record. Record away, sir.
No they are not.Are divorce proceedings covered under tort law?
He's probably already walking to the shitter with tablet and stopwatch in handCad's already recording minutes to bill him.