Swiss court convicts woman for reading husband’s emails - Page 3

greenmount · #41 27.12.2017, 22:47

	Quote:	ZuriRollt
	Not sure whether one should feel comforted if your wife has, or has or has not read this ...

Thank goodness she enjoys speaking only Italian...he shares way too much information here..

curley · #42 27.12.2017, 23:03

	Quote:	greenmount
	Thank goodness she enjoys speaking only Italian...he shares way too much information here..

Well, what ever he writes about her, it's always cordial, warmly and respectfully. Even when he tells us something funny (the hello kitty room foto?), it is always in a tender manner.

Lot's of people who mention their OH's here sometimes could learn from him. I think the wife would have a good laugh if she could read it.

greenmount · #43 28.12.2017, 00:03

	Quote:	curley
	Lot's of people who mention their OH's here sometimes could learn from him. I think the wife would have a good laugh if she could read it.

I was teasing him, curley...
Re. your opinion - I actually think we're all different. Tom is sweet, no doubt, I didn't imply he isn't.

I'm not so sure though that everyone else would enjoy being mentioned here that often, regardless of the manner or the context.

omtatsat · #44 29.12.2017, 09:34

Aargau-that say's enough!

	Quote:	simple_person
	A wife in the canton of Aargau has been convicted of a criminal offence for going into her husband’s email account and reading and downloading information without his knowledge. https://www.thelocal.ch/20171220/swi...usbands-emails

#45 29.12.2017, 11:00

	Quote:	omtatsat
	Aargau-that say's enough!

Your post tells us more about you

#46 30.12.2017, 01:25

	Quote:	ohmy
	Just another disgrace for the Swiss courts. Even though it's a suspended sentence it's an extremely harsh sentence in a Swiss penal court (for a non violent offense). And you have to keep in mind that the court costs are the real sentence in Switzerland (they can hit you as well if you are the plaintiff) . Child abusers, sometimes get better treatment than this lady, violent offenders who didn't kill or maim their victim often get a more lenient sentence. I see many are dumbfounded with such harshness while others seek explanations . Remember it's Switzerland ! And it's no coincidence this made the headlines. The Swiss judicial system sends signals. In this case : don't try to get into people's emails (spouse, boss, colleague etc.) to find out bad stuff. It's the same thing when the system destroys a whistleblower or a plaintiff who fights against misconduct. It's what they do, protect the system of secrecy and dissimulation.

Why a disgrace?

The court does not make the law, and she got a suspended sentence, also who else should pay for the costs of the case, the one who filed the complaint, us the taxpayer or the person who broke the law and thus justified the complaint and case against her?

Harsh or not, court should look at the law and the rules and not give people a discount if they break the law against a partner.

#47 30.12.2017, 02:42

	Quote:	ohmy
	You are very naive or else you are a lawyer or working for the courts (in CH they are all friends and never go against the system). "The courts don't make the law", that's true in theory, well actually not because judges create caselaw which is key in determining future rulings. But in fact judges in Switzerland do pretty much whatever they want. The basic way to do that is to discard evidence. They do that by simply ignoring it (you read that right) or declaring it invalid or irrelevant. Sometimes evidence is lost in the prosecutor's office (as can happen elsewhere as well to cover up things). Of course to convict someone who needs to be convicted (to discredit them or send a message because they uncovered stuff) judges in Switzerland can sometimes fabricate evidence or at least use fabricated evidence provided by the party to the trial that cannot lose (believe me there are several known cases like this). The court costs which are outrageously high (as the judges mostly copy paste previous rulings), also exist as a deterrent. Most of the time you have to put money down to get your case heard, a couple thousands. In Switzerland only the rich in practice have no trouble going to courts to attempt to have their rights recognized. For the average person and the poors the hurdle is too big. The result being the weak in society lose . Powerful interests are preserved , that's what the state wants.

blablabla...

So should the court give no punishment, does that mean that privacy laws are invalid in a marriage? Or in any relationship? And what about a work relationship? Where do you draw the line? My line is very simple: Privacy is a right only to be overturned by granting somebody access unless needed for tax/law/health or whatever valid legal reason.

You make this much more than it is.

Woman broke law, victim files a case, judge upholds law and speaks out a verdict.

No more, no less.

omtatsat · #48 30.12.2017, 10:02

So that the Aargauer behave properly

Name: humor-li-picture-1433.jpg
Views: 438
Size: 34.8 KB

st2lemans · #49 30.12.2017, 11:27

	Quote:	ohmy
	judges create caselaw which is key in determining future rulings

Not in Switzerland, or any other coutry with codified law.

Tom

st2lemans · #50 30.12.2017, 11:30

	Quote:	ohmy
	The Swiss judicial system sends signals. In this case : don't try to get into people's emails (spouse, boss, colleague etc.) to find out bad stuff. It's the same thing when the system destroys a whistleblower or a plaintiff who fights against misconduct. It's what they do, protect the system of secrecy and dissimulation.

And rightly so!

A great day for true justice!

Now, if only they'd start convicting idiot internet trolls.

Tom

k_and_e · #51 30.12.2017, 22:01

	Quote:	ohmy
	There is no such thing as "Justice" in Switzerland. A law professor once referred to the Middle Ages when describing the system. Jean Ziegler's father who was a judge said it himself in confidence to his young son. Remember the children in slavery (and btw modern slavery is alive and well in today's Switzerland) .As a Swiss resident, your biggest fear should be the judicial system. If you need it as a victim, if you fight against abuses by someone holding public office, or if you need a fundamental right to be respected. Oops I forgot : if you like speed on the road. Just one example out in the open (not hidden stuff you find out when you are in courts) : From the penal code : Penalty for molesting a child : Maximum 5 years in prison (suspended penalties are frequent) Penalty for secretly recording white collar criminals : Maximum 3 years in prison Back to the OP post... I am totally in favor of strict laws on privacy. On that topic, there is a lot of hypocrisy in Switzerland, privacy mostly exists to protect powerful interests, corporate interests, the Swiss business of secrecy. The fiche scandal, the continued spying on citizens, the records local police keep on people for the slightest things, the systematic sale of personal data by authorities (hence the constant stream of junkmail), show there is no privacy for the average Joe. Whereas the woman was liable in this case the ruling clearly reflects a specific agenda, i.e. protecting the business of secrecy. Privacy is different within the context of a married couple using same computer and sharing passwords, most people would agree. And frankly if you cheat on your spouse and get caught like this, you are a dumbass and have only yourself to blame. I personally would have handed the lady a fine of between CHF 300 and CHF 500, same as for other misdemeanours. Knowing that, as usual she would have to pay court costs of CHF 1000 ... CHF 4000 (and CHF 9000 suspended) ? No way ... The judge enjoys a relatively large margin of appreciation when determining the penalty, especially because he can look at specific circumstances as in this case (shared passwords etc.). @Tom, case law is really produced by judges' decisions and this is in turn determines the direction judges take when examining a specific situation and deciding on the sentence. In Switzerland, case law is frequently the result of "political" decisions by judges (e.g. to not allow indemnification following misconduct or corporate abuses, or not to overload the judiciary/prison system).

now what is the point you're trying to make? these are just some random statements.

roegner · #52 30.12.2017, 22:26

	Quote:	ohmy
	The point is this court decision makes a decent person sick to their stomach. Just like reading the court related news in the Swiss newspapers. It always disgusted me. And that was before I found out the truth, which is way worse than what you think from reading the papers.

Anything you are actually happy with? Only thing I read from you is negative comments......

And you found the truth......

ZuriRollt · #53 30.12.2017, 22:37

Haven't read the thread, but 'ohmy 'was exactly what I need in my Scrabble right now

omtatsat · #54 30.12.2017, 22:39

This say's it all. The judge is sexist and probably a sex offender

https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/aarga...ulen-131724035

	Quote:	simple_person
	A wife in the canton of Aargau has been convicted of a criminal offence for going into her husband’s email account and reading and downloading information without his knowledge. https://www.thelocal.ch/20171220/swi...usbands-emails

st2lemans · #55 30.12.2017, 22:53

	Quote:	ohmy
	this court decision makes a decent person sick to their stomach.

Far less than your idiotic posts do.

Tom

nickatbasel · #56 31.12.2017, 01:03

The EF would be <automoderated> quiet

	Quote:	st2lemans
	Now, if only they'd start convicting idiot internet trolls.

curley · #57 31.12.2017, 01:19

	Quote:	ohmy
	The 20minutes article which the local.ch article links to, has more info. We learn that on appeal the suspended financial penalty was reduced to CHF 1500, and the fine to CHF 300 (reason for two penalties is there are separate offenses I guess, like secret of correspondance, unauthorized access to computer system). The suspended penalty is still quite high for such an offense. A judge may hand a similar penalty for a violent crime which did not lead to severe injuries. Anyway the message the state wanted to send is clear (note that journalists don't dig themselves in court records to find such news it's handed to them by the authorities who can cherry pick the cases). And this lady may have lost close to CHF 10 000 on the case, CHF 4000 or so for her lawyer, CHF 2000-3000 in court fees (she still lost in the end , only got a reduced sentence), + the CHF 300 fine. Special insurance for legal costs may turn out to be useless in a case where you are clearly at fault. What's interesting is the readers ' comments in the 20minutes article, they are overwhelmingly condemning the ruling. The Swiss people often react candidly via such online forums which I find to be refreshing and often instructive. Obviously on this board, the opinions are not as clear-cut and you get insulted for criticizing the Swiss courts. But here, it's mostly foreigners ! Strange isn't it ? It's been proven that Russia, and some other countries, use online shills to influence discussions and content on the internet. Does Switzerland do the same ?

Man, I sleep so much better at nights, knowing you're out there, know it all and I think you should offer your profound insight to the judges and police-forces of this country, so that they can finally arrive at doing things the true way they are supposed to.

ya man.

aSwissInTheUS · #58 31.12.2017, 02:37

	Quote:	ohmy
	The 20minutes article which the local.ch article links to, has more info. We learn that on appeal the suspended financial penalty was reduced to CHF 1500, and the fine to CHF 300 (reason for two penalties is there are separate offenses I guess, like secret of correspondance, unauthorized access to computer system). The suspended penalty is still quite high for such an offense. A judge may hand a similar penalty for a violent crime which did not lead to severe injuries.

The reason there are two penalties is solely due because the momentary penalty is suspended.

Also the monetary penalty in absolute numbers may look high but is most likely in the range of 10 to 20 days. Please show me a case where a judge handed out less than 30 days "for a violent crime which did not lead to severe injuries".

Salad Days · #59 31.12.2017, 05:29

	Quote:	aSwissInTheUS
	The reason there are two penalties is solely due because the momentary penalty is suspended. Also the monetary penalty in absolute numbers may look high but is most likely in the range of 10 to 20 days. Please show me a case where a judge handed out less than 30 days "for a violent crime which did not lead to severe injuries".

There was one recently discussed on this forum where a man in a speedboat illegally took it into a swimming area, thought he'd done his bit by yelling at an elderly person to get out of the way, ran them over causing severe life changing injuries like amputation, and he got a fine.

omtatsat · #60 31.12.2017, 08:54

if it had of happened in Zürich the case would have been treated completely different. These hillbilly courts in Aargau!

It even got into the outside world-what do they think of Switzerland?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...sbands-emails/