Since my H works for a branch of the government "I" have been banned from the building.
It is so frustrating for me that she can call and make insinuations that I have done something to government computers and they just take her word for it
I guess on the other hand I could take it as a compliment that everyone believes that I am smart enough to hack a government computer that has multiple passwords just to turn the darn thing on.....little lone get into any of the programs
When is she going away.....3 years and counting since the A ended.....help!!!! Barring taking out a contract on her head.....how do you get rid of them?
"A relationship is only made for two, but some bitches don't know how to count"
I realize that I have been pretty good at staying one step ahead of her since I found out but the woman worked with me for almost a whole year while she saw my H on the side.
How do you all contend with a woman like this? Cannot get law enforcement involved although she actually tried a harassment charge that did not fly due to the fact that she "always" made first contact. She just did not hear from the person that she wanted to hear from
Sorry to be venting...just having a bit of a ruff day here. My husband even got "written" up for my "alleged" actions
edited for typos (I always have to!)
It is absolutely unbelievable!!!
I put a keylogger on a personal computer at our home and accessed my H old fb page and personal email.....again at home.....give me a break!!!!!!
[This message edited by BetrayalHurts at 5:34 PM, July 15th (Monday)]
Just doesn't sit right with me.
Did the employer contact you directly, or is this being filtered through your husband?
I ask, because if the latter, it may not be accurate.
That he was written up is appropriate (not because of any computer issues, but because of workplace issues arising from inappropriate conduct). That you, in any way, are involved, is ludicrous.
I would definitely get an attorney.
And I would ask that my husband either find another job, or request a transfer.
That OW has complained that her access to your husband has been restricted (really, a declaration of, "I'll show her who's in charge here! She can't stop me!") is utterly ludicrous.
What is your husband's response to this? How did he respond to the allegations? Does the disciplinary process allow for him to respond? IMO, he needs to document, in writing the actual truth of the matter, and have it placed in his personnel file.
In addition to wanting to know how he responded to OW's allegations, I would very much like to know how he told you about this. What is his demeanor? (I mean, there's no place at all for him to assign blame anywhere but solidly on his own shoulders.)
What authority does this government employer have over you? How can they enforce your compliance with their demand to shut your website?
If any of this is true, I really question its legality.
I'm not suggesting you make your own life harder by fighting battles that don't need fighting. I mean, I'd probably do as asked. But I certainly would do so only pending getting legal counsel.
Something seems incredibly fishy. While "the government" can throw its weight around, there really are procedures, and they often are overstepped.
And I'd be checking to make sure that that hadn't occurred here.
ETA: You say you have a copy of the reprimand. What, specifically, does it say about what is required of you and potential consequences?
Keep good track of that document; an attorney will want it.
I would also ask your husband some very specific questions about the content of the conversation with his superiors. What was said, by whom? While it's fresh in his mind, that should be transcribed as completely as possible. If they're building a case that can result in his discharge for cause, then you will be glad to have as much information as possible to aid his defense.
[This message edited by solus sto at 5:53 PM, July 15th (Monday)]
And if they wanted to fire your husband they would have done it already, not put him on "probation" that can be broken if "YOU" are a bad girl.
Is your husband in a union? This might be something for them to deal with.
Does she work for the government too? If not, why would she complain to your husband's employer that she's having trouble reaching him .... at work .... on a PERSONAL level.
He's more likely to get into trouble for using gov't computers for personal business than anything else?????
Something seems off to me...
There were a few posts that were added as I was posting.
I agree with Solus sto's above post.
This reeks to high hell. Either your husband isnt giving you the full story or there's a lot more going on than you're aware of.
[This message edited by GabyBaby at 5:53 PM, July 15th (Monday)]
The Usual Suspects:
XWH (serial cheater with 12+ OW. Undiagnosed SA?)
Note: I edit often for typos/c
I put a keylogger on a personal computer at our home and accessed my H old fb page and personal email.....again at home
Be VERY careful about admitting this; some jurisdictions have charged spouses for doing this; it is considered hacking and you could potentially be prosecuted.
She made the allegations that I had put this stuff on the office computers and phones and cell phones which is absolutely false....in fact, I am not sure with all the security that it would be possible ....if I had wanted to....anyway.
The OW knows darn well that she was contacting H on personal computer at home. If there was communication at the office, I cannot prove that....although I would be surprised if there was not
Since you are presumably not on a leash controlled by your H, he cannot have his job security based upon someone else's behavior.
This smells fishy to me....
Well my H Bosses got copies of all emails and all read them. They realized that the MOW was a liar and there was nothing life threatening in the emails. This backfired to MOW!
The bosses called the cop and told him that they had reviewed the emails and there were no such threats HOWEVER if MOW feared for her life they suggested that she NEVER return to H job for any public events or she will be escorted off the property...."for her protection"
The worst part was the humiliation H felt that EVERYONE found out what he did...consequences.
DD 6/26/10 (he broke down & confessed)
DD#2 3/14/11 H in OW's car
TT 7/1/11 (NC broken, through emails)
Just get the full story. Call your H's boss, since you were/are an employee and tell them your concerns. Get the advice of a lawyer, if the employer seems irrational or threatening. Her claims shouldn't have been taken as 100% proof without asking your side of the story. And H better be supportive in you getting advice from a lawyer, otherwise I would suspect him as well. Just my 2 cents being a wife who's H works for the big G as well.
Above all, be the heroine, not the victim. - Nora Ephron
It is our choices...that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.
- J. K. Rowling
Are you telling us that the management of a governmental department are taking the word over OW over the security audits performed by the IT department on the government's machines? Ask for an audit and for a meeting that includes the Chief Information Security Officer to review the results. Frankly, if it doesn't pop on an audit, it *did* *not* *happen*. That's how these things work.
Computer access on government systems are role-based. This means that unless you specifically were given permission to install software on a machine, it can't happen. If it's a hardware keylogger (like a dongle), IT would have been able to visit your husband's machine and remove it already.
So unless you're a senior IT person with specific permissions set by the head administrator, you can't install anything and anything you *DO* do on a machine would be logged to show activity of various types, including software installation.
Government information security is tight, and they have a number of audits they must perform yearly and quarterly. All of these audits check for this kind of activity. It's federal law that they perform them.
Active Directory domain controllers record all logins on all machines, so that's one place to look. Most likely they have a SIEM (security information and event management) system that aggregates security logs, which the CISO can review.
If the cheating bastard ()) was reprimanded, it's most likely for violating a non-frat HR policy. Or if their jobs require secret-or-above clearance, an affair could compromise their clearances. That would put his job in peril for sure. And the OW's.
Some gov't departments may not have a huge IT shop, so there may not be monitoring on the local level. In that case, you can request an audit from the division's IT department.
From an IT/security point of view, it just sounds like WH's boss is just pissed that he has to deal with this. That's most likely the reason his job is in peril.
Hell yeah. The story that you told doesn't hold up. I think you're being fed misinformation.
I think it's time to call your husband's bluff and demand that audit. The reprimand you have a copy of isn't enough. If *YOU* are being accused in his reprimand, it's a huge HR no-no. If *YOU* are being accused in his reprimand or anywhere else, you have a right to ask for a review of the IT logs.
From us both:
Furthermore, it is entirely possible that *your husband* is the one to attempt an install of some sort, perhaps in an effort to incriminate you and get you to back off ... and got his stupid ass busted.
More from him:
And even that doesn't make sense. Installing spyware on government equipment is pound-me-in-the-ass prison shit, not reprimand shit.
[This message edited by Threnody at 8:39 AM, July 16th (Tuesday)]
I agree with ThreNody - the story doesn't hold up that you would be targeted by the bosses based on something OW claimed that couldn't possibly happen.
I am so sorry. Sounds like the A has gone underground and your H & OW are trying to create a BH free zone at work so they can relax
Can you arrange to have a meeting with your boss to discuss this? I'd guess they will have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and you may find that your H/OW actually fabricated H's reprimand.