Husband who raped and abused wife isn't entitled to share of marital assets, court rules
A man convicted of raping his wife isn’t entitled to any marital assets in divorce because of his “egregious conduct,” a New York judge has ruled.
Judge Jeffrey Sunshine ruled in the case of “Terrance T.” and “Alice M.” that Terrance’s conduct was the rare instance in which conduct can be considered in equitable distribution decisions, the New York Law Journal (sub. req.) reports. Terrance, representing himself pro se, is serving a 40-year sentence for the crime.
Terrance had sought half the value of household possessions, a portion of his wife’s retirement benefits, maintenance and attorney fees. He had claimed Alice falsely accused him of domestic violence and rape because she was jealous of his relationship with another woman.
But Sunshine said the rape conviction was based on a higher standard of proof than required in civil cases, and Terrance is collaterally estopped from attacking the conviction in the divorce. Terrance’s attempt to retry the rape charge in the divorce case was “a malicious and vexing attempt to cause plaintiff further emotional distress,” Sunshine wrote in the Dec. 23 opinion.
Sunshine said Terrance didn’t contribute to household finances for most of the marriage, and his violent attacks on his wife had caused her to lose past jobs. Alice completed college while Terrance was incarcerated and currently works for a city agency earning about $35,000 a year.
“It appears from the record that defendant’s role in the marriage was solely financially disruptive,” Sunshine wrote. “If the court has ever been presented with facts and circumstances demonstrating egregious conduct by one spouse against another spouse, it is the case at bar.”
