Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

has anyone had spouse put camera in their house

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • has anyone had spouse put camera in their house

    hi,

    just throwing this out there to see

    So we had a nesting arrangement from end of September until March 1 when the matrimonial house closed. Turns out that the wife and her mother (who is the mastermind) put a hidden camera in the house (like Nest cams) somewhere to watch all my activity when I was with my kids on the weekend.

    Obviously it is wrong and huge violation of privacy, but has anyone had this happen to them? Please PM me.

  • #2
    Is it still her house? I guess she could be allowed, it could be considered a security camera...

    Comment


    • #3
      Sorry should clarify, it was the MH. I got it on weekends. There's a big difference between a security camera and putting a hidden one to watch ally activity on the weekends. Video on its own is legal under the criminal code, morally it is wrong though

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kkc View Post
        hi,

        just throwing this out there to see

        So we had a nesting arrangement from end of September until March 1 when the matrimonial house closed. Turns out that the wife and her mother (who is the mastermind) put a hidden camera in the house (like Nest cams) somewhere to watch all my activity when I was with my kids on the weekend.

        Obviously it is wrong and huge violation of privacy, but has anyone had this happen to them? Please PM me.
        Indeed a rare situation. Nesting orders generally come with clauses that prevent this kind of conduct as they are generally only issued by the most experienced justices like Justice Czutrin, Justice Pazaratz, Justice Quinn, Justice Chappel, Justice Lemon, Justice Richette, etc... etc...

        In the absence of what should now be standard elements of a nesting order, your situation is indeed complex.

        1. Evidence of Recording Devices

        How did you come across the "evidence" that the home was being monitored? This matters as you can't operate on an assumption or hearsay in your matter. You can make that allegation but, without evidence of it actually being "truthful" the other party will simply deny it.

        Evidence in this situation is paramount. Many people make this allegation in their cases. I see it a lot actually. Recording devices are available and in theory, it is very easy to do. I simply have not seen anyone, in my limited view, produce the evidence of such conduct. This is not to say it hasn't happened at all...

        But, to warn you the evidence needed to support this claim would need to be possession of the physical devices and a probably an expert witness who forensically analyzed the devices and can prove that they were configured to sending the feeds directly to the other party or a system for which they had control of.

        The matter becomes even MORE COMPLEX if it is a cloud attached device such as a Nest camera. Now, how you would not notice a Nest camera comes into question as well. They are not small devices. But, back to the cloud attached devices. Generally, these services are protected by a level of privacy from the provider. Getting information from Google is hard. You would need to bring them to the matter as a party to force them to disclose the information of who owned the devices and registered them. This is NOT something they give up easily. Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc... Have MASSIVE legal teams and will fight tooth and nail to prevent the order. Especially in a civil matter. Just look at how hard Amazon fought against providing the evidence from their speaker device in a MURDER trial!

        This article outlines what I am talking about: https://globalnews.ca/news/4661963/a...new-hampshire/

        https://www.lifewire.com/when-tech-i...murder-4149689

        2. Are They Stupid Enough to Use It?

        Ponder this... If the other parent and the "not-so-clever" out-law may be stupid enough to use the evidence. I won't bother even touching the "legality" of the matter because in my humble opinion their conduct is in your favour. In fact, I would recommend you don't even mention you know or suspect.

        A judge would SLAUGHTER them if they presented the evidence of any sort of recording of you in a situation for they were not a party to the conversation. What the conduct will demonstrate to the court is that the other parent has NO TRUST in you, cannot be trusted to act in accordance with the "best interests" of the children. It also shows that they are willing to violate the privacy of you and the children. This would be an EPIC DEMONSTRATION of nonsense that would result in probably the most EPIC caselaw against that parent.

        I would let them walk into court with the evidence and recommend you bring popcorn for you and your lawyer to enjoy as the Judge strips the other parent of custody and access as a result.

        Especially if the evidence they present in the videos is benign and does not demonstrate anything under Rule 24.(4) violence and abuse against you. Now... To the next heading.

        3. Rule 24.(4) Violence and Abuse (CLRA - Ontario)

        This is where things get cloudy when it comes to this kind of evidence as Rule 24, the "Best Interests of the Children" can and often does usurp the rights of parents. If the evidence they produce in fact demonstrates you conducted yourself in a violent and abusive manner to the children. A court can overlook how the evidence was gathered and claim that Rule 24 usurps your right to privacy as the best interests of the children is what is actually being determined.

        But, if they did have evidence of violence and abuse you would have been arrested already on that evidence probably. So, it is safe to say the recordings don't assist them in making a claim against you as a parent.

        Again, let them be stupid enough to try and use the evidence. Some times being silent and letting the other party step into a huge steaming pile of stupid conduct is the best course of action. A good barrister will tell you this...

        4. But, they may know something else that you didn't want them to know...

        Based on the location of the device in the home. They may have got nothing on you and your parenting but, if you made a phone call to your lawyer or discussed the matter openly after the kids were in bed with someone. They have that information. They won't use it but, they know your theory of the case and what you are planning to do. This is still very bad for you. They know what you are possibly planning in the matter. How frustrated you are. If you are running out of capital to fund your defence in the litigation etc...

        General advice to everyone:

        You know that baby monitor you have in your home. The one with the camera or even the voice recording one. It is dead simple to go out and purchase the same one and sit in a car close to the house and listen in on everything.

        I highly recommend that if you are in a situation that you are separating from the other parent that you throw these devices in the garbage and parent like its 1979. Listen to your children with your ears. These devices are not secure. If you have an internet connected one that claims to be "secure" simply search on Google to see how easy it is to hack these devices.

        Not having a device in the house means no one can listen in.


        Good Luck!
        Tayken
        Last edited by Tayken; 03-16-2019, 10:15 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Honestly, I would have assumed the presence of the camera. Nesting only works if you really get along. Otherwise, it is a plea for conflict from those who feel their life is insufficiently complicated.

          Comment


          • #6
            Janus... Quote of the month goes to you!

            "Otherwise, it is a plea for conflict from those who feel their life is insufficiently complicated."

            Comment


            • #7
              If there isn't anything found on the video, then they are simply shooting themselves in the foot by presenting themselves as high conflict and "looking for trouble". You need absolute proof however that they are videotaping such as involving the police (where a police report is produced) which describes how they videotaped and tried to use evidence against you.

              Comment

              Our Divorce Forums
              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
              Working...
              X