The actual issue, if it is this case, is that he recorded her naked without her consent or knowledge. The taiwanese court ruled that spouses should have a presumed right to privacy in their own homes, And as such found him liable.
Legally, at least in America, there's laws for reasonable expectations of privacy. I.e. can't be recorded on a private call without one party mentioning it first, can't record on private property without consent. You CAN do these things but let's say you record a crime the evidence will get thrown out due to reasonable expectation of privacy laws. I'm not a lawyer and I'm sure there's probably exceptions like police operations.
You still cant leave the recording device to take footage when you're not there. You need to be active participant in the event otherwise you'd still be breaking the law.
It should be pointed out that the requirement to notify the other party of recording varies heavily between states, and even in states where you are required it is generally only required if you intend to publicize the recording or use it in a legal dispute.
Evidence collected illegally or as a consequence of illegal conduct by police is still inadmissible. Lawyers call this “the fruit of the poisonous tree”.
The exception that you’re probably thinking of is called a warrant.
Evidence collected illegally can sometimes still be admissible, especially if the illegal conduct was not by an agent of the state.
And this is not what "the fruit of the poisonous tree". That's when the police use evidence illegally gathered to get more evidence. For instance, if they search your house illegally, find a locker number, then open the locker and find a gun, the gun is fruit of the poisonous tree.
Reasonble expectation of privacy laws in the US only apply to bathrooms, and rooms where you have a sense of "ownership" or privacy from another.
For example, if two roomates share an appartment, the common areas like kitchen amd livingroom have no reasonble expectation of privacy from eachother, but do have a reasomble expectation of privacy from guests
But in their own rooms they have the expectation of privacy from eachother, as its "their room"
A husband and wife would not have any reasonble expectation of privacy from eachother outside of the bathroom, unless they had their own private rooms that excluded eachother in some capacity.
It's footage of your own home though, it's kind of ridiculous that you wouldn't have full right over it. Imagine being arrested for "spying" on your own home lol
This is a concept I've been meaning to read up on more.
For instance in European countries if you're rich and ugly you'll usually marry someone rich and ugly. In the US ugly rich guys marry pretty poor girls, often creating this sort of dynamic.
The divorce rules are there both to keep women in these situations out of poverty but also a sort of recompense because she wouldn't have had 3 kids if she thought she wouldn't have access to his wealth
The law is abused, though. It was meant to stop men from abandoning their wives and leaving them to care for children without any income. It was not meant for women to cheat on their wealthy husband and then steal half of their money.
We need to have a serious conversation about recording vs what you're allowed to do with the recording. I can see why you don't want your spouse to be able to upload naked videos of you or posses them privately especially if things aren't going well, but you often do need video evidence for things think Johnny depp trial.
Believing this is insane. They are a married couple, he caught her cheating with a camera, saying he is wrong for "having the footage of the affair" is unbelievable. It is their own home and the robot comes with a camera which was known at purchase.
I dont know about Taiwan specifically, but at least in the west cheating certainly isn’t illegal, recording other people without their knowledge however definitely is.
Private investigators have been legally recording people without their knowledge in the West for a very long time, often specifically for proof of infidelity purposes.
No one in "the western world" has ever or would ever be convicted for something like this. It would be like going to jail for checking your spouse's phone.
Pretty sure it's always illegal. What you might be thinking of is that the proof, despite being illegal, may be allowed in courts depending on the country.
I can’t speak to Chinese law but I would challenge you on (2).
Morally, a couple deserves privacy but if one partner is using the jointly owned home to betray the terms of the marriage, with infidelity, that privacy should no longer protect them from the other partner discovering and gathering proof of their unfaithfulness.
Consent of recording shouldn’t matter at all in this situation -as their spouse never gave consent to the extra-marital affair
Again, this comes back to “2 wrongs don’t make a right”.
We are speaking of morality before legality here, but I would argue according to both the fact the husband didn’t give consent to the affair has no bearing on the fact the wife gave no consent to being video recorded naked.
If he had killed her for the affair, would you use the same logic to justify murder? If he had tied her up and tortured her in the basement, would that be justified since her consent is allowed to be violated in your view due to her having violated his first?
These are hyperbolic examples intentionally, but they hopefully drive home the point. Her performing an immoral act doesn’t give him free will to “return the favor”.
if good or even neutral people leave an avenue for bad people to do bad things without accountability, that avenue will be utilized.
I take it you want to have an affair and do not want your partner to have an avenue to hold you accountable....
oh...not you, you say...your only making your argument from a neutral standpoint for the right of privacy....
meanwhile every nefarious actor cannot be held accountable because this person argues on principles of privacy for a very narrow scenario....
I can't tell you how infuriating it is to see both sides and understand both are wrong but both sides, while having intelligence to argue their reasoning l, are the most unwise groups imaginable.....
Fundamentally speaking, the entire justice system works on the idea of two wrongs trying to make a right.
Any sentence or fine is a “wrong to make a right”. So we should make sure our laws follow our morals.
Now when considering moral conflicts we have to consider which is the greater principle.
Ex: A woman discovers her husband is using their home to cheat with a camera from a device that they rarely use. She wants to divorce him.
Principle 1. She has a right to record & present the material she has that validates her reasons for divorce in court(which may be challenged)
Principle 2. He is protected from being recorded naked without his consent.
Now the second principle is generally designed to protect him from malicious or exploitative actions.
But considering the scenario above, which principle is greater? Consider the order of actions as well
That’s a very bad slippery slope, to say that some crimes are “ok” if the intent is for a greater good.
Cheating is immoral but not illegal. Recording private citizens naked without their consent and presumably distributing the recording (as used in a legal case) is actually illegal in most countries.
Was Grindelwald in Harry Potter right and moral? Many dictators in today’s world may start off w benevolent “intent”, does that make their authority more moral and good?
it is spying though. She has a reasonable right to privacy in her own home, being filmed naked without consent is a violation of that privacy. It’s literally that simple.
If I'm not distributing, selling, or sharing the footage, I do believe I have a right to security cameras in my home regardless of what they capture lol
This is not the same as having security cameras that happen to record someone nude. this is covertly recording someone in a space they’d have reasonable expectations of privacy, so it’s closer to setting up a hidden camera in your bathroom.
Except the spying wasn't done with explicit intent on perving on someone.
If you suspected someone of stealing in your home and caught them in the act yet they happened to be in a compromising position exposing themselves, would that still be a violation of their own rights?
Nah not really because what if the video is solely for use in court in regards to the infidelity and then disposed of besides court record, that's not fair he'd be punished for that when he required it as proof
From what I read, he was not actually spying, he was attempting to use the robot to communicate with his wife via audio+video and happened yo catch her cheating
Spouses have a presumed right to privacy in their shared home? As in the people who live together, share everything, have seen everything many times over, and are supposed to know everything about each other. The people for whom keeping secrets or infidelity are grounds for divorce. Sorry, not sure I follow.
He was trying to catch her cheating but was not doing so with the express intent of self arousal.
This is comparable to CP laws where people are protected from possession if they are law enforcement or someone who happened to receive them unsolicited yet chose not to open them and turned them in with the express intent to help said law enforcement agencies among other similar instances.
I don't think being married to someone gives them the right to film you secretly in your home. I'm amazed anyone thinks a presumed right to privacy is unreasonable.
Oh I think that’s because you’re not thinking very hard at all. Maybe when your spouse (lol) puts a camera in the toilet you’ll be cool with it because you have no secrets
What’s the cut off tho? Bathrooms and private spaces 100% agree.
But a vacuum would most likely be in common areas, in the guys own house. Should be allowed to put a camera in your own house common areas if you want to.
I have cameras that record indoor activity. If someone is going to walk around my house naked, they will get recorded. It is my home. It is my camera.
Now, granted my spouse also lives in the same house.. does that mean that camera is illegal to be put in my own house.
There are some you can remotely connect to and use the camera... But those things are generally pretty loud. Im pretty sure they would hear the robo vac turning on.
One thing learned about reddit is that everyone will view the world through the lense of the western world and if you try to imply things work differently elsewhere you are sort of just wrong
Would the defense have an easy time proving that he just randomly saw it through the camera he just casually checked since that literally happened in his house?
No morality judgement, but some extra information. This didn't happen in the US - it happened in Taiwan.
Cheating is perfectly legal, but you can sue for civil damages. Which is exactly what he did.
However, in Taiwan, there are privacy laws... Very much like we have in the US (specifics depend on the state). Having a camera is fine, and having the robot vacuum is fine, but you can't use it to record someone with an expectation of privacy.
The woman was in her house. She was naked. You can't record your spouse in that situation, without their consent.
He did record her. Without her consent.
He only did it once, but it's very much against the law to record your spouse the way that he did, in Taiwan.
The wife and her lover were found guilty of infidelity and ordered to pay $16k USD (jointly) to the husband.
The husband was found guilty of violating her privacy and fined about $5k and sentenced to five months in prison....but in Taiwan he can just pay more to stay out. So he's effectively facing a $10k-ish fine
It seems he intends to appeal the decision. But even if it doesn't work out, he will very likely to just pay a fine, though it seems fairly large IMHO.
I just can’t believe he had to pay a fine unless he uploaded them online for others to see. That would be morally wrong imo. But to record proof of an infidelity just to use in court… then that’s fair play to me.
It was also her house, so she had the right to privacy. You don't have the right to spy on your roommate just because its "your house" anymore than your roommate has the right to spy on you.
In addition, some places are illegal to record period, such as bathrooms.
Plus as others have said, recording footage of her nude without consent.
I suppose that makes sense if you put it that way. This really complicates the matter, now it's more down to what's more immoral here. Here what the husband set out to do was proven to be right yet because of his way of doing it, he was blamed and jailed instead.
Would you say the court should make a sort of exception for cases like these or treat them the same way as the room mate example you gave?
Its not really that complicated, for the simple reason that cheating isnt a crime, its just immoral.
In the courts eyes, violating the law to spy on someones legal (even if immoral) behavior is definitely worse than the legal-but-immoral behavior.
It would be murkier if he spied and caught her doing something blatantly illegal, IIRC there are usually exceptions to privacy law when it comes to blatant criminal acts.
It's not entirely different, the basis is recording someone without their knowledge.
If you put security cameras in your home the other people that share the home with you need to be made aware of them. If you installed 3 cameras in shared spaces but only told your roommates about 2 of them.
Anything the 3rd camera recorded would be illegal because they're being recorded without their knowledge.
So every country that disallows someone from recording a naked roommate or spouse on the toilet without their knowledge is a shithole as long as you own the house?
You moved them, filming someone in the bathroom without their knowledge isn’t defensive behaviour no matter how you spit it, it has nothing to do with this case, I don’t think you’ll find anyone that thinks is moral lol
Okay, let’s leave the toilet out. I meant bathroom because that’s where people usually are naked more often. But it doesn’t matter for the point.
So let’s stick to just filming a naked roommate/spouse without their knowledge?
Or hell even just filing them and storing their pictures without them being naked at all. In the end „naked“ is not the real factor here.
Having a law against that makes a country a shithole?
Giving people the right to their own picture makes a country a shithole?
Garbage timeline 100%. Right he didn't do it to see his own wife naked but to discover the cheating. Ridiculous. Taiwan sounds like it sucks. And you can just pay more to stay out of jail? What a disgrace of justice
I check the case out. he wont around 19k from her but she got him jailed for 5 months and. got 4700 bucks back.
15k after he leaves. did he win or lose?
Also in america it wouldn’t happen but the video itseld would be inadmissible as cheating evidence . After all as long as one person want to in their own home they can.
Depends on his salary, and even then it's going to be on his record which might affect his future unlike the ex-wife's affair. Also I personally value time more so imo the wife won, sent him to jail for 5 months and wasted who knows how long of his life with a cheater. All that and she only needed to payout 15k? She made out like a bandit.
you forget 15 k in taiwan can let a single person live comfortably for 12-15 months. in the us it might last 3-4 months but when he get out of jail he have 12-15 month east living cushion. like all ultiitiew mortage etc rentel. not to mention the assest in the divorce.
This isn’t just immoral. It’s stupid. She cheated on their marriage and the husband gets a jail for “Spying without consent” in their own house while the Wife’s secret boyfriend is literally the stranger there?
I can feel the Husband’s family getting enraged by that and so as the Wife’s parents can be feel ashamed.
The stranger has consent from one of the residents so its not trespassing, recording someone naked without their consent, no matter where, is against the law.
I can’t just invite a girl to my house and record her secretly because it’s “muh house”.
Idk how promiscuity is being treated by the legal system there but at the very least it’s not being clumped together in the same case.
Maybe he will have a smoother divorce🤷
Cheating : immoral
Spying : immoral & illegal
The verdict of this case: neutral
It’s not illegal to invite someone to your home without your spouse knowing. Cheating is obviously immoral, but recording people without consent in what’s also her own home too is not legal. Especially videoing them naked
For the lawsuit, the man submitted "evidence" of her infidelity to public record. This gets passed to the District Attorney because it shows he recorded her without her consent...and distributed it to the court.
I think any reasonable courtroom / judge would realize that the dude clearly wasn't recording them to make porn, and probably would have been happier to not see his wife naked with another man, but simply captured the affair as proof of his suspicions
When we start acting like dumb, mindless robots who cannot comprehend nuance like that, well you get draconian police states like Taiwan apparently
I don't think cheating is illegal. Just immoral. But spying is both. So assuming this isn't made up, I can see how that could happen. Both actions were immoral though.
I agree with you here. If he was using the footage for monetary gains or revenge then it is definitely immoral. However, him using it to catch his with cheating in THEIR OWN HOME, how is that immoral!?
Not immoral to attempt to catch infidelity within reason. He didn't stalk her or anything, so moral.
Also not immoral for her to work within the framework of the law and countersue if her rights were violated.
5 months in prison is a totally disproportionate punishment and the law should be reviewed to allow for greater nuance. But I understand not wanting the law to start eroding on privacy rights, that's a slippery slope and leniency might encourage more people setting up spy cams to spy on spouses.
The takeaway is, if you do do something like this, don't use it as evidence, and do not keep the footage. Don't mention it to anyone, and use it to inform how you will "officially" catch out your unfaithful partner.
A similar thing happened to my friend. She recorded how her ex was abusing her and recorded how aggressive he was when he was "taking care" of their kid, that he was using drugs, etc., and she was fined for nonconsensual recording. I've heard them, and the recordings were terrifying. Sounds of hitting and choking, the kid crying in the background, him screaming profanities... She wanted to protect her kid but unfortunately lost the fight. The only good thing is that the kid is now old enough to decide, and he is refusing to visit his father even for a meal.
As a only mildly silly counterpoint - if you put a hidden camera in your toilet/shower/etc without telling your invited guests they absolutely can sue you over that and win basically everywhere in the US.
As a super ridiculous counterpoint, if someone is in your home involuntarily - say because you kidnapped them - the cops absolutely can add a charge related to illegally filming that person on top of the charges for kidnapping, assault, etc just based on the cameras in your home.
Now partly they do that so they have some charges they can choose to drop as part of negotiations with your lawyer, but the fact remains in most states of the US you can in fact be sued for recording stuff in your own home
I ask you this, if you were in the same situation and you've just caught your spouse cheating and the "Save Video" button is there, what would you realistically do? I would say the majority of people would hit the button rather than let the video be deleted.
Obviously cheating is immoral, and the man should have the right to know that his wife is having sexual contact with someone else (because it puts him at risk if his wife catches something and then passes it to him, plus it's a violation of their relationship) but spying on someone in their own home, even if you live there too, is illegal for a reason. A robot vacuum very likely has terrible security, so the camera can easily be hacked by a third party (this is the same issue that baby monitors with cameras have). Even if the man in question never shares the footage, it's probably already being shared by an unseen hacker.
Intentionally getting the roomba just for filming someone without their consent: sketchy. Getting a roomba with a camera you both know about and catching her: fine.
I think in a case where you're trying to prove something on the grounds of a legal basis, there should be some reasonable (restricted) exemptions to expectations of privacy in cases like this.
If someone is intentionally blackmailing me in my home or if someone strips in my home as a way of indecent assault, or if someone even just attempts to defraud me in my home, I should be able to use recordings to prove it, even if they are an allowed guest in my house.
This is a tricky one though because cheating in a marriage isn't a crime obviously, but it is something you still require legal evidence of in most divorce hearings, so it's complicated. Obviously there should be heavy restrictions and requirements, but private eyes typically will take photos to document affairs-even though in normal situations that would be considered stalking, so it stands to reason this would be similarly allowed.
It doesn't make sense to me. So like the court encourage cheating over putting camera in your own house to see if there is some unwanted individual that would DUCK YOUR WIFE?
So if you plan on a divorce due to infidelity, and you don't want to lose half of everything you own, how else can you guarantee it? You can pray that they'll fess up, but they are already lying to you about the cheating in the first place. Without video proof or an admission of guilt I see no other way for the one being cheated on to guarantee not being financially ruined for what could very well be the rest of their life.
Is there more to this? Was the video distributed elsewhere besides just the court?
Genuine question by the way if any would be able to answer.
---i did just realize it said he sued, not divorced...does this have something to do with it?
So if she knew that the roomba was in the home and knew that it has a camera and that it moves about the house recording things as it does its job, couldn't that be seen as implied consent? The whole event is strange at best but welcome to the age of cameras, microphones and GPS trackers in every device imaginable.
I swear to god these kind of posts with random parts in another color showed up not even a year ago! Where does this type of post come from? Is it an AI thing?
986
u/Just-Clerk-8669 11h ago
I want a link to the actual case before I make judgement because thats not how counter sueing works.