Jealous Husband Offers Wife to Highest Bidder on eBay

A jealous husband who suspected his wife of cheating, sought revenge by putting her for sale on eBay. The highest bid – $969,890.

Paul Osborn, 44, kicked out his wife Sharon and advertised her on the Internet auction site. The description described her as a, “cheating, lying, adulterous slag of a wife” to the highest bidder. His auction quickly became an Internet phenomenon, with users forwarding the link worldwide. As you might have guessed, Sharon Osborn, denies the affair and cops are now investigating Paul Osborn for harassment.

Harassment?

As far as I can tell, Paul Osborn is expressing his opinion in an Internet ad. How does this qualify as harassment? It seems as though he has every right, granted in bad taste, to express his opinions on eBay, and if he is not in violation of their listing policy, the cops should find something better to do. There are speeders and donuts everywhere that need attention. Besides, if she is cheating, which I’m sure the police failed to investigate, then that would simply make Paul Osborn’s comments true, now wouldn’t it?

Remember when eBay was just for selling junk to people you didn’t know?

Advertisements

18 Comments

Filed under Culture, Politics

18 responses to “Jealous Husband Offers Wife to Highest Bidder on eBay

  1. No link for this story?

    I don’t understand why you think the police should investigate if Ms. Osborn is cheating or not since that would not be any type of crime.

  2. Original link:
    http://www.fox23.com/entertainment/weirdnews/story.aspx?content_id=520b07a0-d013-48b7-be7e-1da3183da606

    It could get worse….
    Jealous wife ran over cheating husband three times….As the investigator’s video camera rolled, an enraged Harris allegedly killed her husband in a Texas hotel parking lot by running him over three times with her silver Mercedes-Benz and leaving the car parked on top of him.

    Read full story here^_^..
    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/06/1028157922214.html

  3. MJ,

    Neither is calling your wife a ‘whore’ on eBay. That is the point I’m making. Why are the cops looking to charge Paul Osborn with harassment?

    In plain legal language, harassment (and we must assume the cops are pursuing sexual harassment charges in this case)is defined as creating an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct.

    Shouldn’t the cops verify that she was not cheating before Paul Osborn is charged??? If she was cheating, then he was simply decribing what his wife is – a cheating wife. He didn’t even level these comments directly at her, which is also necessary to meet the legal standard.

    As far as I can tell, an eBay ad either does not meet the legal standard of “sexual harassment,” or at the very least introduces a wide gray area of legal interpretation.

    Sorry.

  4. British Cop

    Hi there,

    I do not think Ms Osborne has a leg to stand on as to be harassment, there would have had to have been two or more courses of conduct to fall under the legislation, however, she may have a plight for a Public Order complaint. To be honest it is probably just the press speculating.

  5. British Cop,

    You’re probably right on all counts.

  6. British Husband

    He published her phone numbers, address, email etc and encouraged people to give her abuse. That’s the harassment. Although if she did do it I reckon that’s fair enough…

  7. Aussie mummy

    So if the shoe was on the other foot, would the police investigate? most proabaly not. I am sick of women who play the i am innocent role.

    Go for it Paul! good on you.

  8. mike

    That guys is totally smart knowing the unattractive picture of the nose pick would get blasted around the world

  9. Frank C.,

    The link you provided really had no details what so ever on the story. I did a Google search and found no more information and only seen two sources from the UK where I assume this took place? Since the source was from FOX NEWS I wonder if this is a real story or something picked out of a tabloid.

    British Husband said,

    “He published her phone numbers, address, email etc and encouraged people to give her abuse. That’s the harassment. Although if she did do it I reckon that’s fair enough…”

    Sorry, even if Ms. Osborn did cheat on her husband he still can’t harass her.

  10. MJ “revoltingpawn”

    I did my own google search and came up with 15900 hits from a wide variety of sources including Yahoo News. That would be 15898 more than you came up with.

    Search parameter I used, “paul osborn puts wife on ebay”

    http://in.news.yahoo.com/ani/20080515/r_t_ani_od/tod-man-tries-selling-slag-wife-on-ebay-8c03725.html

    Here’s another link from a local ABC affiliate in the U.S.

    http://www.abc2news.com/entertainment/weirdnews/story.aspx?content_id=520b07a0-d013-48b7-be7e-1da3183da606

    The story is quite real. 15900 sources can’t all be wrong.

    As far as harassment goes, please review my prior comment. Citation below:

    “He didn’t even level these comments directly at her, which is also necessary to meet the legal standard.”

    Paul Osborn may be liable for defamation or something else, but as a certified paralegal, I assure you the potential harassment charge here is thin at best. I’m talking from experience of course.

    This story seems to vex you. Almost seems like you’re trying to sabotage this thread on purpose??? You being a contributor on this blog, I must admit, this confuses me a bit.

    Maybe we should discuss it sometime.

  11. Chickenman

    I think its funny that “Matt P” is debating legality and yet isnt a lawyer – is a paralegal in a entirely different country.

  12. Tim

    Matt P said “15900 sources can’t all be wrong”… therefore we are to believe the next couple of Jehovah’s Witnesses who knock on our door? I don’t think so. A large number of people making a claim can and often ARE wrong! What evidence is there for that “Jesus Christ” bloke anyway?? Just because a lot of people claim something is true, doesn’t per se make it true. Tim

  13. Chickenman,

    I have prepared harassment conplaints in the U.S. and I am familiar with the laws here. The U.K. (assuming that this is where the story originates) and U.S. use an adversarial legal system rooted in English common law, both with similar substantive law and case precident on these types of matters.

    Just seems logical to conclude that the legal standards on harassment would be similar as well. Again, I am just commenting based on past experience working in law offices in the U.S., nothing more.

    Hopefully a U.S. or U.K. lawyer will comment on this important story to clear things up once and for all!

  14. Tim,

    I guess?????

    Just pointing out to MJ “revoltingpawn” that more than two sources were found on Google. My comment, “15900 sources can’t all be wrong,” was an effort at being sarcastic.

    Thanks for the philosophical reply though.

  15. Matt…

    I meant to say did a Google News search and not a regular Google search and also never said only had two hits. What I stated was found only two U.K. sources. Everything I had seen including the two links from you is basically the same cut and paste story. I was hoping for a source locally that is reporting with more information. It has been described as a “internet phenomenon” but yet there were little details I could find in my quick search.

    We are having a whole discussion on if this would be harassment or not but does anyone have any details on this story?

  16. Mike,

    Just to be clear, I found a ton of sources from the U.K. – the majority of the 15900 I spoke of.

    I didn’t think this story would generate such heady discussion.

  17. Marty

    So we have his opinion on her, nothing to prove it is fact and everyone is saying what a great guy he is. If he’s such a start then why would she even look at someone else?
    I think he had no right to do it, it’s trial by publicity and she hasn’t had a chance to put her side fo the story. AFter some effort I found a story which says she has denied the affair…so what if she didn’t do it? Or what if she did but was driven to it by the nasty behaviour of her husband, who on the face of some of the answers to questions on the ebay ad which I saw, isn’t exactly Prince Charming? In the answers section he implied he had video of her shagging animals?? Isn’t that libelous (assuming he hasn’t)? I think they BOTH sound like absolute scum.

  18. Dee

    How is the husband jealous? I think hes betrayed more than anything.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s