[web_stories title="false" excerpt="false" author="false" date="false" archive_link="true" archive_link_label="" circle_size="150" sharp_corners="false" image_alignment="left" number_of_columns="1" number_of_stories="5" order="DESC" orderby="post_title" view="circles" /]
A lady in Utah is furious because a court ordered her to hand up to her ex-husband copies of private picture albums that she had previously given to him as gifts before the couple divorced.
Lindsay Marsh, 43, from Layton, stated that she felt violated due to the ruling that required her to provide her ex-husband, Chris Marsh, with redacted photographs that depict her nude, topless, and lingerie shots. Chris Marsh is the ex-husband of Lindsay Marsh.
Marsh stated in an interview with Fox News Digital, “You don’t know where to turn because you don’t know the law.”
“You have an ex-husband who you were married to for years forcing you to distribute what is essentially porn, and he thinks it’s OK, his attorney also thinks that it is OK, and then you bring it in front of a judge, and he thinks it’s OK.” “You have an ex-husband you were married to for years forcing you to distribute what is essentially porn.”
According to the judgment, Judge Michael Edwards of the Second District Court ordered that Chris Marsh is allowed to retain copies of the albums so long as the photographs of her in lingerie or without clothing are covered up.
According to Lindsay Marsh, the original photographer covered the romantic inscriptions and messages with black boxes before turning over copies of the image to Lindsay Marsh’s ex-husband. The affectionate descriptions and comments were not altered in any way.
She stated that people ought to be aware that this was what the judge had ordered and that it was unacceptable.
She stated that she was taken aback when her ex-spouse included the albums on the list of assets he sought in the divorce settlement and that she filed for divorce in April after being married for 25 years.
“Some of these images show me in my underwear,” the mother of three children said. “When we went to trial, he never questioned about images of our children, our family, or our pets. Neither did he ask about pictures of our family. He requested a few photographs with these albums that featured me solely.”
Marsh interpreted the request for the photo as “retaliation for divorcing him.” However, Chris Marsh supported the decision that the court had made.
According to Fox News Digital, “I never requested for the images; all I asked for were the inscriptions.” He stated that the judge had provided her with the option to duplicate the album pages, make any necessary corrections, and then hand them over. He said that she did not have to provide them to another person to be edited.
Lindsay Marsh has stated that she did not go public with her story to criticize her ex-husband but rather to assist others who have found themselves in a situation like hers.
“It’s embarrassing, and it’s violating that anyone has to go through anything like this,” she added. “Anyone has no right to be forced to go through something like this.” “If I can stop this from occurring to even one more person, it will have been worth going to all this trouble. I think it’s important that this judge be called to account. The actions he took were inappropriate.” A request for a statement from Edwards was not immediately met with a response.
Please go to our website, unitedfact.com, if you are interested in getting information of this nature.
