My client acted out of genuine concern for Jane, who is vulnerable due to her dementia. Jane's daughter had a right to know about the man who was potentially taking advantage of her mother. Exposing the father's past wrongdoings was necessary to protect Jane's inheritance and well-being. Did she have other options? Maybe. But when you see a crime about to happen, you have to act quickly. It is a daughter's duty to protect those who can't protect themselves.
The defendant's actions were a gross overreach and a blatant invasion of her father's privacy. Instead of having an honest conversation with her father or seeking professional advice, she chose to meddle in his personal life and spread damaging information. This was a clear attempt to control her father's relationships and finances, driven by her own biases and suspicions. She could have handled this situation in many different ways, yet she chose the most nuclear option possible.
While the defendant's concerns about her father's past behavior are understandable, her actions were excessive and intrusive. Contacting Jane's daughter and providing sensitive documents, including arrest records, was a significant breach of privacy. The court acknowledges the potential for financial exploitation but finds the defendant's methods disproportionate to the perceived threat. However, the father's history and the circumstances surrounding Jane's inheritance do raise legitimate concerns, which the daughter brought to light. The breakup was a direct result of her intervention, which the court also must recognize.