Now with the tape out, people will track them down. I bet they are flinching every time the doorbell rings.
I don’t suppose whoever released the tape thought of how this would make them feel.
TMZ pays. I don’t think feelings were in the equation.
Was the therapist obligated to report a crime like this to the police?
But she did happen to have an extremely private recording that she handed over to authorities in 2012. She’s just a nice woman who recorded therapy sessions without her husband’s or their therapist’s knowledge.
Are you fucking people crazy? News comes out that a guy has molested at least two kids, and most assuredly more, and you are bitching that his wife didn’t respect his privacy? REALLY? Please tell me you are joking. Besides the fact that his doctor should be a mandatory reporter, I don’t want any person who molests kids to use therapy as a means to hide their abuse. This guy is a complete piece of shit. This lady did the world a public service by outing him.
Can’t they both be in the wrong?
They can. But the difference in degree in if the error should be reflected in the commentary. That anyone would have MORE sympathy for him is completely indefensible. Besides, what she did was not morally wrong given the stakes.
The way that it was explained on Nancy Grace (I watched it against my will. Someone was watching it at work, and I ended up watching it, too) is that the statute of limitations in this instance applies because it goes from the date of the incident being reported, not from when it occurs.
I make no claim as to the validity of the argument. Just relaying what I heard.
I agree. After I posted that, I started to realize that the version that article put out left more questions than it answered. After reading more articles, it sounds like she secretly recorded it on the advice of her divorce attorney. And while she may not have physically released it, how did the police know she had it?
Most people agree that molesting a child is a terrible crime. If the allegations are true (which they likely are, as I don’t think he would confess otherwise) I would hope that his victims get the justice they deserve. I was under the impression (erroneously) that these were crimes that could not be prosecuted, or that had already been prosecuted with a failure to convict. I’m not sure what the criminal investigation in 2012 was pertaining to or whether those allegations were founded. But the point is, it was my understanding that the public knowledge of these incidents would do nothing to prevent further damage or help the victims in any way.
There is a fairly sizable part of me that would like people who commit criminal behavior to find some help to change that behavior. There is a part of me that questions the value of mandatory reporting in general and particularly in the case of patient/client privilege. I think it is prudent to mandate reporting in the event of imminent harm to oneself or someone else, but I’m not confident that these criteria were satisfied. If he were talking about the intent to continue his disgusting behavior it would be one thing, but as I understand it he was discussing things that happened over a decade previously. The biggest evidence we have that he was not an imminent threat to anyone is the fact that the therapist never reported it and had no knowledge of the recordings. I know this case has a pretty heavy disgust factor, but these laws exist for a reason - to protect people who need help. Violating the law even if the outcome to the perpetrator is deserved is not necessarily a good precedent to set.
The preponderance of evidence seems to suggest this woman wasn’t motivated by concern for potential victims but was just being a spiteful bitch. I really don’t like the idea of people recording private therapy sessions for spite. In this case he deserves to get nailed to the wall, but the general theme of a wife using her husband’s secrets to spite him is to me personally distressing. As is the idea that someone could secretly tape my therapy session and get away with it. So, I hope she doesn’t get away with it.
I would hope that one’s strong feelings about the latter would not be interpreted as as a lack of strong feelings about the former.
“I asked the girl if she wanted to rub the Gold Monkey for luck. She misinternpreted. It was smply a communication failure.”
Look closely at this cast photo and you’ll let out an ‘ewwwww’.
mmm
I’m going to go with the bigger criminal here is the woman secretly recording. Even child molesters seeking mental health counseling in order to get better should be entitled to patient/therapist privileges. The woman recording, the lawyer who advised her and any law enforcement who egged her on should all be charged too.
I’m not sure your impression is erroneous.
Either way, I looked at the TMZ site again. Its seems to be getting uglier by the hour.
I should have written in my earlier post that I agree with you in the larger principle. I was only pointing out the technical piece at the time that she might not have leaked it to the press. Now that I’ve read more, I agree with you even more that she’s not blameless in this.
In the larger picture, I very much agree with you that people getting away with recording private therapist discussions really act as a deterrent for people to speak freely with their therapist and who are just trying to get help. It would really be a hindrance to couple’s therapy if people had to worry about divulging truth if they had to wonder if their spouse is secretly recording the process to use against them later.
This is 100% false. This guy, based on his profession, would have access to children on a regular basis. Even if he doesn’t go to jail, outing this guy hopefully means he will never have the opportunity to be alone with another kid again.
The efficacy of therapy as a means of reforming pedophiles is less than promising. More importantly, the justice system requires that criminals answer to victims and society for their crimes; not their therapist.
Society has more of a duty to victims or crimes than the people who victimize them, even if they are trying to get help.
Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. Particularly with pedophiles who rarely just stop cold turkey.
There is no evidence she violated the law, particularly since she was guided by a lawyer on this issue.
WHO THE FUCK CARES. Honestly, a healthy percentage of criminals are convicted with evidence and testimony from other criminals, accomplices, and other scumbags. That is the nature of the business. Criminals often don’t surround themselves with upstanding people. The idea that her motives are more than a talking point is crazy.
Why does it matter? She was IN the session with him. She could have easily outed him herself. All the recording does it provide evidence that prevents him from lying, and it publicly embarrasses him. She has no duty to keep his disgusting secrets.
I just want to highlight this absurd, disgusting comment in case anyone makes the mistake of taking you seriously in the future. Makes perfect sense that the woman LEGALLY recording a pedophile is worse than the pedophile.
And if case you were wondering if it is legal, here is a cite
Again, you think a woman legally recording someone on the advice of her lawyer is bigger criminal than the guy molesting kids? Please tell me you don’t have a job with even a modicum of responsibility or critical thinking requirements.
They won’t because they did nothing wrong.
God forbid some criminal is not free to talk freely about their heinous crimes without worrying they might have to answer for them.
[QUOTE=brickbacon]
Why does it matter? She was IN the session with him. She could have easily outed him herself. All the recording does it provide evidence that prevents him from lying, and it publicly embarrasses him. She has no duty to keep his disgusting secrets.
[/QUOTE]
It matters because I’ve been on the other side of this picture, in the sense that I was the victim, and the violation of my client/therapist confidentiality pretty much ruined my 17 year old life. So I’m not the biggest fan of mandated reporting or setting precedents for violating client/therapist confidentiality (I also have studied the issue of mandated reporting academically and there is plenty of evidence to suggest it’s not a beneficial policy.) You are looking at this outlying case in its specifics to evaluate whether or not it should be a good rule for everyone. I think failing to protect client/therapist confidentiality will ultimately harm many more victims than it protects. Perhaps my view is incomprehensible to you because you’ve never had your life ruined because of something you said in therapy with the expectation that your statements would be confidential. It is a massive, profound, earth-shattering violation of trust that should never be taken lightly.
Your claim that her actions were legal contradict the citation posted on the first page of this thread by a CA lawyer citing CA law. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just saying in the very least it’s debatable.
Glad you have strong opinions to go with your general bad sense. You would be mistaken in believing that she made the recordings legally. She made secret recordings of a therapy session and I’ve cited the law that makes it illegal. No California lawyer would give the advice she supposedly received. It is plainly illegal in California. As part of my legal practice, I’ve looked this up easily a number of times to find the code section, and it is really easy to find. FoxNews is not a reliable source for anything. If you think it is, you have bigger problems than can be solved in a secretly recorded therapy session.
Yeah, the child molester is a criminal, so is his wife.
There are a lot of examples of secrets that aren’t crimes that could ruin people’s lives if they were secretly taped. In the larger picture, confidentiality is worth protecting. If this case isn’t the best example of that (and I’m not commenting either way), it still holds true in general.
Wrong. I am listening to a story about a well known actor molesting kids and thinking what a piece of shit he is. I am not thinking this is a referendum on mandatory reporting laws.
So you trust a random stranger on the internet rather than this woman’s lawyer, and a lawyer quoted for a fact checked article? And that stranger happens to be the same guy who said this woman is bigger criminal than the pedophile she recorded? That’s your reliable source?
Wrong. Here is the relevant cite which comments on code 632 you linked to ealier:
So pretty much what the article I quoted states. Care to retract your statement?