Cost of an affair in North Carolina - $8.8M!

[cmccuist]

Dude makes $84,000 per year. How's he gonna pay? The husband seems like an a-hole and that marriage was circling the drain anyway, but dayum!

Expensive girlfriend

[fintstone]

Glad to see that. If you want to screw around, get a divorce first. Let your spouse move on and find someone else too. Want your cake and eat it too? Pay the price.

Apparently the wife was not very happy after marrying a much older husband. What did she expect, to get his money but not have to put up with the old fossil? Funny, the husband looks just like a guy that posts here. Could be a twin.

[cmccuist]

I wonder what the award is based on. A couple million for compensatory damages and six million in punitive!?! That's a lot of punitive.

[herr_oberst]

Crikey! That's a tough way to learn a lesson in legalese!!

(Anyone who's ever read even the worst spy thriller knows that you want to get a burner phone if you plan to make phone calls that you don't want others to know about!)

[Alan A]

Wonder what he’d have got if he said she raped him...

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by herr_oberst

Crikey! That's a tough way to learn a lesson in legalese!!

The guy took advantage of a vulnerable woman and ff-ed her over.

If he had her safety/best intentions in mind he would have done things quite differently.

I think it is a bigger way to learn a lesson in don't be a skunk.

I'm not going to judge either side of this ex-marriage because I have no way of knowing them, but the outside guy it is pretty dang obvious.

A real man sees when a women is emotionally weak/vulnerable and doesn't take advantage of it.
There are lots of situations a man could for his own ends get some nights but the woman will be regretting it later,
and often that regret results in increased weakness. It is a vicious cycle and a guy that uses it is despicable.

[javadog]

That's ridiculous.

If that husband wasn't such an *******, his wife would not have done what she did.

I have to say the judge is an idiot, also, for awarding such a pointless settlement. It's not justified, nor is it feasible.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by javadog

That's ridiculous.

If that husband wasn't such an *******, his wife would not have done what she did.

I have to say the judge is an idiot, also, for awarding such a pointless settlement. It's not justified, nor is it feasible.

So you think it is a good idea to put the woman in a worse situation; by maintaining the marriage and sneaking around screwing her, which also results in making the husband more of a asterisk filled space?

Like the judge said, this was not the way to end a marriage.

This guys actions were to take advantage of her, not to help her.

Death penalty would perhaps be more suitable.

[javadog]

Perhaps you're not old enough to look at this from the woman's point of view. Or, perhaps you've been on the receiving end of an unfaithful partner. I don't know.

The bottom line is the husband was abusive, probably from the beginning of their marriage. There are many kinds of abuse and even if he was never physical with her, he certainly crushed her mentally. She did not deserve that, she was looking for a way out and I'm not saying she picked the best choice but you have to lay the blame where it started. That was not with her lover, or even her, it was with the controlling, abusive husband.

If you have a relationship with a woman it needs to be positive, not negative. Nobody has the right to miss treat a partner and they should have no right to complain when a relationship goes south Because they were abusive.

Death penalty? Grow up.

[fintstone]

I guess I am not mature...because I do not call this abusive:

"Keith King, who is 15 years older than his wife, controlled her access to money, manipulated her low self-esteem, brought porn into the relationship, looked through her phone every other week, put her to work without pay, and continued to schedule shows after she said it was too much work and she needed help with her daughter, Patrick said. He tracked her movements and insisted she keep her hair blond, and wear bikinis and high heels, Patrick said."

Read more here: https://www.heraldsun.com/news/local/crime/article215577310.html#storylink=cpy

I suspect most guys would track the movements of a wife he knew was cheating on him, expect her to contribute to the family by working in the family business, etc. If she wanted out, it is pretty easy to get a divorce. Sounds like a gold digger who didn't want to give up the gravy and a guy that expected she deliver what she promised. She knew she was marrying an older, goofy looking dude. Her choice. The "other guy" should have insisted she gain her freedom before he milked the cow. No one buys a cow when milk is free. Letting her husband pay for feeding and housing the cow he was enjoying the milk of is a clear foul. Hs choice. Don't write a check you don't want to cash...at least not in NC.

[Tervuren]

None of us have enough information on why they got married, what their agreements were, or what happened with that.

We can choose to fill in blanks and spin things to say the husband was bad, or the wife was bad, but ultimately we lack that information.

But to F a woman for multiple years, maintaining a bad relationship, there is no way to spin that.

If she was trying to use him to "trade up", he should have taken a different path.

If he was trying to keep her weak and vulnerable so he could use her, that was wrong.

There is no way to spin what the sue-ed guy did as good.

He did wrong, really wrong.

When it comes to whether the Husband was a good husband or not, we would have to take the word of liars.

I'm not gonna make that judgement based on dishonest people unless I have first hand information one way or the other.

Hopefully this helps send a strong message, and maybe stops some skunks from taking advantage of women in weak places.

[john70t]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I suspect most guys would track the movements of a wife he knew was cheating on him, expect her to contribute to the family by working in the family business, etc.

Leave a woman alone in your bedroom?
"I'm going out for a while"
Bam two minutes later she is going through everything there.
It's not snooping. It's just being curious and knowing her partner.
Her right as a woman.
Also her right as a woman to destroy the porn collection you've spent 10,000hrs collecting.
And you are a controlling SOB male if you catch her and object.

The good news is men are finally demanding true equality.
(ain't liberalism sweet?)
Social exceptions and privileges reserved for only some should now be demanded by all.
Women lie, steal, cheat and commit violence even more than men sometimes.
We need the updated legislation to direct divorce courts and the legal system to enforce true sexual equality.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I guess I am not mature...because I do not call this abusive:

Those are textbook examples of emotional abuse. If you think those are normal, acceptable behaviors in a relationship, then you probably should read a few books on the subject, or consider counseling if you're in a relationship. That behavior is not healthy.

From what was described in the article, the husbands bad behavior preceded (and likely led to) the wife's bad behavior.

Originally Posted by Tervuren

None of us have enough information on why they got married, what their agreements were, or what happened with that.

I'm just discussing the facts as presented, which is all we can do. The husband ****ed up their relationship, no question. Frankly, you reap what you sow.

I still think the judge's award is ridiculous.

[aigel]

4 idiots here:

Husband
Wife
Lover
State Law

The husband married a trophy wife. Not smart.
The wife is a gold digger
The lover is a horny idiot
State law is outdated

If my wife gets seduced by some lover, I sure don't think it is that guy's fault to where I need to collect damages ...

G

[john70t]

Originally Posted by javadog

Perhaps you're not old enough to look at this from the woman's point of view. Or, perhaps you've been on the receiving end of an unfaithful partner. I don't know.

The bottom line is the husband was abusive, probably from the beginning of their marriage.

And knowing he was 'abusive' she went ahead and married him.
Who's to blame for that?

I do like the idea of calling types of controlling behavior 'abusive'...
although that same word is also used to describe very real and very serious physical and sexual abuse....
which can be intentionally confusing when tossed around in passive conversations and courtrooms.

Women are master manipulators of social environments, and their behavior can easily borderline on 'abusive' in a split second or long term.
It seems to be commonly accepted for women to have a long line of male 'friends' to fall back on.
True sexual equality should correct this.
We as a society should become more aware of people using controlling and manipulative and abusive behavior.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by john70t

And knowing he was 'abusive' she went ahead and married him.
Who's to blame for that?

I do like the idea of calling types of controlling behavior 'abusive'...
although that same word is also used to describe very real and very serious physical and sexual abuse....

The way it usually works with these *******s is that they are two different people before and after the marriage. They keep their behavior in line when they are dating and turn into Mr. Hyde after the marriage. So, it's possible she didn't know ahead of time. There are also women that think they can "fix" defective men, so there's that.

Nonetheless, it's the husband's behavior that was a problem.

If you think it's some sort of novel idea to describe bad behavior as abusive if it doesn't involve physical or sexual abuse... Well, let's just say that emotional abuse is probably more common and no less damaging in the long run. I would wager that almost all women deal with some form of emotional abuse in their lives. Not cool...

Frankly, I'm surprised at some of the opinions expressed here.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by aigel

4 idiots here:

Husband
Wife
Lover
State Law

The husband married a trophy wife. Not smart.
The wife is a gold digger
The lover is a horny idiot
State law is outdated

If my wife gets seduced by some lover, I sure don't think it is that guy's fault to where I need to collect damages ...

G

Agreed! Also, how are these even real legal charges? Criminal conversation, alienation of affection, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress. Is that from the Puritan rule of law?

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Agreed! Also, how are these even real legal charges? Criminal conversation, alienation of affection, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress. Is that from the Puritan rule of law?

I haven't seen/read about this case but "alienation of affection".... yep, NC still has some pretty messed up, ancient laws, some still on the books, Bible belt...I've seen that one before. Boink yer wife like a heathen (non-missionary position)....and yer going to hell/jail (in theory)...that's just a sample. I predict that the damages will be drastically reduced by a judge with common sense...as it usually is in cases like this...based upon what I've seen in the past.

Puritans? Haven't thought about those liberals in years

[kach22i]

I tried reading the article, but I don't want to know these people's business.

I assume it's like a soap opera.

Do you guys get into this stuff?

Originally Posted by aigel

4 idiots here:

Husband
Wife
Lover
State Law

The husband married a trophy wife. Not smart.
The wife is a gold digger
The lover is a horny idiot
State law is outdated

If my wife gets seduced by some lover, I sure don't think it is that guy's fault to where I need to collect damages ...

G

Thank you for the concise breakdown.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Tervuren

None of us have enough information on why they got married, what their agreements were, or what happened with that.

We can choose to fill in blanks and spin things to say the husband was bad, or the wife was bad, but ultimately we lack that information.

But to F a woman for multiple years, maintaining a bad relationship, there is no way to spin that.

If she was trying to use him to "trade up", he should have taken a different path.

If he was trying to keep her weak and vulnerable so he could use her, that was wrong.

There is no way to spin what the sue-ed guy did as good.

He did wrong, really wrong.

When it comes to whether the Husband was a good husband or not, we would have to take the word of liars.

I'm not gonna make that judgement based on dishonest people unless I have first hand information one way or the other.

Hopefully this helps send a strong message, and maybe stops some skunks from taking advantage of women in weak places.

She cheated...and not just once, but over a prolonged period which involved a great deal of planning and subterfuge. There is simply no excuse for that. That is a pretty good indicator of her character. Everything else is he said/she said.

Although the following does make one tend to believe she is not exactly a saint, but rather a manipulative beoch:

"A district court judge found in another case that Danielle King had sought a domestic violence protection order to gain an advantage in a civil suit and to protect her lover from being sued, assessing $15,000 in sanctions for a frivolous lawsuit, Foil said"

Read more here: https://www.heraldsun.com/news/local/crime/article215577310.html#storylink=cpy