New York Divorce and Family Law Blog : New York Divorce Lawyer & Attorney : Clement Law Firm : Family Law Serving Manhattan, Westchester County, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, New York City

Remember the YouTube spectacle of Tricia Walsh Smith who publicly humiliated her husband and, ultimately, herself.

In the age of social networking, new rules of apply to couples going through divorce.
The rules, as compiled by Time, can succinctly be boiled to one- “Discretion is the better of valor.”

1. Don’t brag.

Your claims of poverty will ring hollow if you brag on Facebook about your purchases of expensive items or post photographs of lavish vacations.

2. Keep the party off-line

Sure you may want to let off some steam, but if you are engaged in a custody fight, the pictures of you holding a bong in one hand and a half empty bottle of “Jack” in the other are not going to win you points with the judge. They probably are not going to be too helpful when lecturing your kids about sobriety or on your next job interview.

3. Guilt by association.

You are who you hang out with. See Rule No 2.

4. Keep the details of the divorce private.

Don’t fuel the fire with comments and criticisms on the internet. No one likes their spouse’s divorce attorney or the judge after an unfavorable ruling. But remember, the judge is going to make many rulings in the course of a case- some you will win, others you will lose. Do you really want the judge to rule on your case after you publicly criticized him or her?

5. Don’t Defriend.

As Time points out, unless it is high conflict, “Don't "defriend" in-laws or your ex's friends right away. People need time to adjust.”
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The verdict is in - it is no shock that the Youtube videos of Tricia Walsh-Smith back fired.

I previously wrote about how Mrs. Walsh-Smith lashed out against her husband Philip J. Smith in the her now famous YouTube video.   In the video, Ms. Walsh-Smith discusses, her marriage, the unfairness of her pre-nup, her marital sex life and more.   At one point in the video, she even  called her husband’s office and spoke to his assistant about his stash of Viagra and porn.

In my post, I predicted that this attempt to humiliate her husband would not be helpful to her case.

I hate to say I told you so, but my pointed criticism of Ms. Walsh-Smith was predictive of the court’s decision.

In granting a divorce to her husband Philip J. Smith on the grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment, Justice Harold B. Beeler found that Tricia Walsh-Smith's "exposure" of his private life caused him "enormous mental distress.”

As the New York Post put it:

Beeler blasted Walsh-Smith for her video stunt, which he called "a calculated and callous campaign to embarrass and humiliate her husband" and to pressure him into settling the case on more favorable terms than were stated in their prenuptial agreement.

The New York Law Journal quoted the decision:

 Given Ms. Walsh-Smith's YouTube postings and "her exploitation thereof in the media circus" that ensued, "there is no doubt that her conduct, taken in its totality, has now so endangered the plaintiff's physical or mental well-being as to render it unsafe or improper for him to cohabit with the defendant

The Judge found that the prenuptial agreement, signed three weeks before the couple's 1999 wedding, was valid. Walsh-Smith must now leave their Park Avenue apartment within 30 days. 

Now, the only question is will Walsh-Smith make a follow-up video about how the judge or her attorney wronged her.   

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Discretion, being the better part of valor, it is seldom a good idea for a party to a divorce, to publicize the gory details of their case. But one ill-advised wife went even further;   she made  a You Tube video so she could air her dirty laundry.

In her video, Tricia Walsh Smith discuss her sex life (or absence of) with her husband, her husband’s stash of porn, condoms and Viagra, her relationship with her step-children and the terms of her pre-nuptial agreement.

As pointed out in the Legal Blog Watch:

A number of divorce lawyers interviewed for an Associated Press story criticized Walsh-Smith's tactics.  Attorney Bonnie Rabin commented that You Tube videos "bring the concept of humiliation to a whole new level."   Moreover, videos can ultimately hurt litigants -- a judge might question a party's judgment in posting a video and hold it against him in ruling on the case.  And there's always the possibility of a defamation action if the video rants include intentionally false information.

Walsh-Smith is now represented by famed divorce attorney Raoul Felder -- though she wasn't his client when she made the video.  Felder told AP that he thought his client "comes off well."  However, the majority of commenters on the video disagree; many labeled Walsh-Smith a "gold digger," with one even comparing her to another Brit involved in a contentious divorce: Heather Mills.

This video is simply an awful idea. It should not be emulated.   Despite Ms. Walsh’s attempt to portray herself has a naïve spouse, rejected by her husband, she comes across as shrew, mean and vindictive. 

The video is intended only to embarrass and humiliate her husband. It can also be viewed as a not so veiled threat as to what may follow if her husband does not capitulate to her demands.   Either way this type of conduct is reprehensible.

If this type of public broadcast of martial differences ever caught on, I would expect it to be negatively considered in decisions awarding equitable distribution, maintenance and, most certainly, child custody.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks (2)