dreamy1945 Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The OW & MM got caught yesterday and a PI produced pictures. He called the wife to tell her he had pictures of them. Do you think the wife hired the PI or the OW hired him. The wife is not claiming she did it. Do you think the wife is trying to put the blame on the OW. By the way, this isn't me but my good friend. Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The OW & MM got caught yesterday and a PI produced pictures. He called the wife to tell her he had pictures of them. Do you think the wife hired the PI or the OW hired him. The wife is not claiming she did it. Do you think the wife is trying to put the blame on the OW. By the way, this isn't me but my good friend. Why would the OW do it? The PI is required to give his client info, not a 3rd party. Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Does it really matter now? Your friend and her MM have been busted. I would think that D-Day and all the fallout is what she should be worrying about. Anyway, if your friend is saying she didn't set this up, then obviously it was his wife. OR, it could've been the MM. I'm sure there's alot more going on here than is being posted about.. Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The PI could be a friend of the betrayed and wanted her to have the info without her having to hire him. Its possible. How is the W putting the blame on the OW just because she denies hiring the PI? If the OW is claiming this, I think the OW is the one lying and being manipulative by trying to frame the W as not trusting the H or giving the W the evidence to make her do something. Its a whole new twist on the 'letter to the betrayed' we keep reading about. LOL Link to post Share on other sites
IfWishesWereHorses Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The PI could be a friend of the betrayed and wanted her to have the info without her having to hire him. Its possible. How is the W putting the blame on the OW just because she denies hiring the PI? If the OW is claiming this, I think the OW is the one lying and being manipulative by trying to frame the W as not trusting the H or giving the W the evidence to make her do something. Its a whole new twist on the 'letter to the betrayed' we keep reading about. LOL Or the person who did the hiring of the PI was a friend or family member of the W OR possibly an OOW???? I've seen both scenaios. Link to post Share on other sites
lonelyandfrustrated Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The PI is crushing on the W, and is trying to get the H out of the picture by taking photos of the H with an OW who the PI hired to act 'over-friendly' with the H when the husband was just trying to put his briefcase in the passenger seat of his car...so the photos look like the H is opening the door for a woman...and then later photos show the H's car in front of a hotel, but strangely the license plate is obscured...and then there's a blurry photo of the OW wrapped in the arms of a man who has the same build and hair as the H, but the man's face is obscured... lol. What was the question? Link to post Share on other sites
GPFan Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 The wife is not claiming she did it. Do you think the wife is trying to put the blame on the OW. By the way, this isn't me but my good friend.My guess would be a close family member who didn't want to be involved with telling, perhaps a parent or sibling. If so, it's a smart move that clues in the betrayed in an undeniable manner whilst avoiding being the bearer of bad tidings or being accused of making it up or having an overactive imagination. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts