Man owns ex who plotted against him via a fake facebook persona

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Who said it was a crime to have a fake account?

It is not improper to have a monopoly, but it can be improper to use your monopoly in a certain way.

It is not improper to have a fake account, but it can be improper to use your fake account in a certain way.

MotionMan

Now that we've established that, what is the specific crime she committed, especially since you agree that she should be "charged for fraud". This outta be good.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
Now that we've established that, what is the specific crime she committed, especially since you agree that she should be "charged for fraud". This outta be good.

Fraud (at least in California, where I practice) has been defined as "A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intend to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury."

She made a false representation in hopes that her husband would act on it in such a way that he could lose custody of their kids.

Was that good for you? ;)

MotionMan, Esq.
 

amish

Diamond Member
Aug 20, 2004
4,295
6
81
ha, good to see that people are putting South Bend back on the map...unfortunately it is for being an idiot.

her fake name was "jessica studebaker". studebaker??? come on, anyone from south bend will know that is a fake name...
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
lol. Maybe this was her profile pic:

Lazystude.gif
 

Drako

Lifer
Jun 9, 2007
10,706
161
106
ha, good to see that people are putting South Bend back on the map...unfortunately it is for being an idiot.

her fake name was "jessica studebaker". studebaker??? come on, anyone from south bend will know that is a fake name...

How is Studebaker a fake name? I know several real life Studebakers.
 

SZLiao214

Diamond Member
Sep 9, 2003
3,273
2
81
This thread reminds me of the one where the guy gets himself snipped, The female tried to get him to pay child support for a kid she had with another guy.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Fraud (at least in California, where I practice) has been defined as "A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intend to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury."

She made a false representation in hopes that her husband would act on it in such a way that he could lose custody of their kids.

Was that good for you? ;)

MotionMan, Esq.

There is no guarantee that the court would rule in her favor (e.g. legal injury) just because he was cheating. It may add to her case, but it would not stand on its own for custody since there are so many other variables (income, mental state, drugs, criminal background). Hence, by your legal definition, it wouldn't be fraud.

An easier example: Say this lady gets a friend of a friend to solicit her husband on facebook. It's not "fraud" even though there is some deception involved. The fact that this lady created an anonymous profile and did the same thing doesn't change the fact that anyone can legally solicit a person on facebook, real or not.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Did I say that? Where?

MotionMan

You responded to my post (#66) where I was responding to her209's question of "How is she not charged with computer fraud?". So you obviously thought she should be charged with computer fraud if you wrote 2 paragraphs explaining why it's fraud.

Unless you're just a troll and meant the dictionary definition of "fraud". But I gave you more credit than that. The topic is whether it's an arrest for computer fraud, which it's not.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
There is no guarantee that the court would rule in her favor (e.g. legal injury) just because he was cheating. It may add to her case, but it would not stand on its own for custody since there are so many other variables (income, mental state, drugs, criminal background). Hence, by your legal definition, it wouldn't be fraud.

The final result of the custody battle is not necessary for the fraud claim. The fact that the intent was to deceive and to get him to do something damaging to his legal position could be enough.

An easier example: Say this lady gets a friend of a friend to solicit her husband on facebook. It's not "fraud" even though there is some deception involved. The fact that this lady created an anonymous profile and did the same thing doesn't change the fact that anyone can legally solicit a person on facebook, real or not.

The thing with the friend could be fraud, too. However, if an disinterested third party solicited him (without intent to deceive) and the wife found out about it and used that in court, THAT would NOT be a fraud.

The fact that she created a fake personality is further evidence of a possible fraud.

MotionMan
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
You responded to my post (#66) where I was responding to her209's question of "How is she not charged with computer fraud?". So you obviously thought she should be charged with computer fraud if you wrote 2 paragraphs explaining why it's fraud.

Unless you're just a troll and meant the dictionary definition of "fraud". But I gave you more credit than that. The topic is whether it's an arrest for computer fraud, which it's not.

You mean this?:

You do not need to get money or impersonate a real person for it to be fraud.

And it could still be fraud even if others do it and it is easy to do.

Where does that state that I thought what she did was fraud? I was simply pointing out that getting money or impersonating a real person were not necessary elements of fraud and that "everyone else is doing it" or "it's easy to do" were not defenses to claims of fraud.

Not trolling at all. Simply educating both sides.

MotionMan
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
The final result of the custody battle is not necessary for the fraud claim. The fact that the intent was to deceive and to get him to do something damaging to his legal position could be enough.



The thing with the friend could be fraud, too. However, if an disinterested third party solicited him (without intent to deceive) and the wife found out about it and used that in court, THAT would NOT be a fraud.

The fact that she created a fake personality is further evidence of a possible fraud.

MotionMan

Come on, all she has to do is have her friend say she was interested in the husband but then had second thoughts. Even if she was charged with fraud, it's a small price to pay for: a) Knowing your husband is a cheating POS and b) helping your custody case.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
Come on, all she has to do is have her friend say she was interested in the husband but then had second thoughts. Even if she was charged with fraud, it's a small price to pay for: a) Knowing your husband is a cheating POS and b) helping your custody case.

If she and her friend want to commit perjury, you're right, there is not much anyone can do.

I am not sure that being charged with fraud (and possibly perjury) is going to help her get custody over the ex-husband (who, now that I think about it, as an unmarried man, is, I assume, free to have sex with about anyone he wants (except jailbate, of course), including his ex-wife's friends).

MotionMan
 
Last edited:

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
If she and her friend want to commit perjury, you're right, there is not much anyone can do.

I am not sure that being charged with fraud (and possibly perjury) is going to help her get custody over he ex-husband (who, now that I think about it, as an unmarried man, is, I assume, free to have sex with about anyone he wants (except jailbate, of course), including his ex-wife's friends).

MotionMan

Now here's a question, did this lady create the profile to try and possibly get him arrested for stat rape? Because that would be grounds for huge legal injury.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
Now here's a question, did this lady create the profile to try and possibly get him arrested for stat rape? Because that would be grounds for huge legal injury.

The article only said that she was trying "...to gain information she could use against him in a custody battle..."

BTW. how does one commit statutory rape against an imaginary person?

You're probably thinking of this kind of situation:

young_one.jpg


MotionMan
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
BTW. how does one commit statutory rape against an imaginary person?

MotionMan

Yes, I was thinking of the pedo stings. Which are technically "fraud" as well by your definition, amirite? Fake profiles online used to deceive pedo's... hmm.

If he knew she was underage, then he could absolutely be charged with corruption of a minor if she alerted the authorities and they stung him when he went to go meet her.
 

amish

Diamond Member
Aug 20, 2004
4,295
6
81
LOL, I'm fully aware of what a Studebaker automobile was, and its origins, so what is your point?

i guess i'm pointing out that more, or less, thought should have gone behind the name. anyone with a few brain cells from south bend would have smelled something fishy.

I guess you think Smith would have been a better fake persona?

obviously[/snape]
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,312
12
81
Yes, I was thinking of the pedo stings. Which are technically "fraud" as well by your definition, amirite? Fake profiles online used to deceive pedo's... hmm.

The government can "commit fraud" via stings, fake hookers, etc.

MotionMan