They both did things wrong, both he and she, but the story would have been different if he had lost instead of winning, things were not so good for both of them, well on the one hand it is very bad that he took that money without consent, why, in the event of losing it, how would you have paid for it? this is something that should be considered, and getting $10k is not easy at all, that has to involve a lot of effort and hard work, earning that money means that she has to sacrifice a lot of things and that all the profits go directly to her, and that It's something that sticks, that's what you have to see, even though that didn't happen.
Nope, the girl don't do anything wrong. He is just claiming the money that is supposed to be hers in the first place. The one at fault here is the guy. He steals the girls money. Then when he won, he get selfish and wanted to keep most of the money by himself. As far as I understand, the girl has the legal right to own all the money because it was his money that the guy used. Now the guy is getting people's sentiment by saying he don't want to lose his girlfriend but at the same time does not want to give half of the winnings to the girl. I think that don't want to lose his girlfriend line is bull****. If he wants to keep his girl, give her what she demands, and the case would be finished.
In the story, there is nothing wrong on what the girl acted but it's normal that she will ask for something because it was her own money that his boyfriend use. I am sure that if the same scenario happened to us, we will also act the same. If there is wrong here, that must be the guy because he is very greedy.
Someone that stole his girlfriend money, he may not be responsible at all and may not even like the girl and decide to just run away and never give the girl anything than the money stolen, or very little amount in addition to the money stolen. But if not to be biased, the guy should at least give the girl an amount that is enough for the girl to appreciate.
That should be but the guy gets greedy. If the case came to court, there is a huge chance that the girl will win the case.
Yes in the first story, the girl has the right to demand what is she missing. At the first place the guy took her money without consent and it is tagged as stole money, if it will be in the court I think the girl will win the case even though they are not married but the thing is, it is stolen. In the second story, the boss doesn't have any right not unless it has a another side of the story, but if he just demand to have some because it is his employee then that's what we call, power tripping and it is not good, he can file a case for that since he has a money.
What if the court only said that only money that was stolen and the one used for court expenses should be paid and nothing more? In court case, we can not just conclude that one person would win without consulting lawyer to know what could be the possible outcome, while lawyer may not even be favored by the judge.
That is a what-if, but the logic of the guy should have not won the money if the guy doesn't steal the girl's money is a stronger argument. Besides, the guy would have not won the amount if he has no money to bet at all. So it is a matter of where thus the fund came from. More or less the best decision here would be a split but I am leaning toward the possibility of the girl getting all the money.
