Clara Walker: Leon Walker 'Violated My Privacy'

Clara Walker, the ex-wife of Leon Walker, the Michigan man who may serve time behind bars for reading her email as a means of exposing her extra-marital affair, tells her side of the story to ABC's Nightline this evening.

Walker--Clara's third husband--had previously appeared on the Today show to discuss his rationale for breaking into her Gmail account on their shared computer.

In this exclusive interview with the show, Walker says:

"I hope that he will let go of this anger that he has towards me ... we are a team, whether he likes it or not."

Interviewer Bill Weir pushes back: "But you do know that you're going to testify against him with the goal of putting him in jail, so that's a lot to ask."

"It is," responds Walker. "But what does he expect me to do? I mean, he violated my privacy. I was violated. So what about me? ... He's making it all about him. He forgot what he did. And it's not fair for him to keep this going and forgetting about what he actually did to me."

The segment airs tonight at 11:35 p.m. ET.

WATCH:

Comments

[jbabbs12]

07:20 PM on 01/28/2011

Again Mr. MicCullough we the people would like to know why an attorney that does not normally do this kind of law practice would handle Ms. Walkers case. You have a direct relationship with Ms. Walker or with her 2nd husband Michael? What is your connection, because I know if I needed this kind of attorney I would not have looked in your category to find you to represent me. Also, in one of your reports with ms. Walker, you state there was no abuse by husband no. 2 so either yourself or your client is NOT telling the truth. Which one of you is not? To my understanding there is are written statements from both parties, Ms. Walker says she was hit and her shirt ripped, and Michael hubby No. 2 police statment never says the he didn't do this and he was arrested and sent to jail over night So who is lying you or Ms. Walker. You see when you have one person that is clearly lying outright to the public it's hard to believe anything they say. And by saying your represent this poor example of a person, woman and a mother, are you trying to further your career in this area of law or just get your name in the spotlight so your name gets out there? So again... we would like to have these questions answered since you could not do it on the other post.

[Tone67]

10:35 AM on 01/11/2011

If she'd been a black woman this case would be unheard of, literally.

[Latwanda]

03:40 PM on 01/11/2011

That be sooo true!!

[rmarie]

11:03 PM on 01/11/2011

That's true...if it had been a Black woman, no national TV outlet would've given her airtime to go on TV--crying, talking about her privacy being violated--when she was the one that took her kids around a convicted domestic abuser just so they could mess around.

[Mayoyo]

09:56 PM on 01/10/2011

What about her cheating.....what nerve!

[Carson12345]

06:18 PM on 01/10/2011

She forgot her cheating was the catalyst for his "crimes"? Robert, you are right. There was no crime committed and no criminal intent. Clara you're forgetting one of the basic tenets of good sportsmanship that most of us absorbed with our morning wheaties during kindergarten: There is no "I" in team.

[Cynthia Hsiung]

10:12 PM on 01/10/2011

I think a lot of people are being distracted away from the privacy issue: Have you ever had someone read your private emails? Isn't it similar to having someone tape record your private phone conversations, open your personal mail, read your diary - In other words, aren't all of these things, reading emails included, an invasion of privacy? Why is it hearsay to enter a tape recorded conversation and illegal to open someone else's personal mail but not considered wrong to read someone else's email that is password protected? Why not take passwords away completely then from email accounts? I think before anyone makes a judgment call here, they should try having their private past emails read through by someone else and see how it feels. I think you will indeed feel violated. Please, let's not get too distracted from the main issue of privacy. If this case is more about divorce and he said/she said, well, let the divorce court decide that part. But I believe the issue at the heart here is more about privacy and the protection of email privacy which should be a concern for everyone, not just a couple going through divorce.

[merlin57]

06:14 PM on 01/10/2011

My take is that this is simply profiling for her to be able to "win" the divorce and any settlement arising from it whether it be custody or financial.

[Robert McPhalen]

09:57 PM on 01/09/2011

What really makes me sick is all of the news articles and media saying "husband 'HACKED' wives account" - he didn't hack ANYTHING. Hacking refers to the re-configuring or re-programming of a system to function in ways not facilitated by the owner, administrator, or designer. He did not cause her computer to function in any way in which it was not designed to function; he didn't go in through a back door; he didn't use a keystroke logger; he didn't even "shoulder surf" - in fact there was ZERO social engineering involved in this so called "hack". It was not done with the intent to defraud or to obtain money, property, or a service by a false or fraudulent pretense, representation, or promise; he did not "exceed valid authorization" - he USED a valid password to gain access; he did not alter, damage, delete, or destroy property or cause denial of service in any way (he COULD have changed her password - he didn't; he COULD have sent out pornographic images using her account - he didn't). What he did was find out the truth - but somehow SHE'S the victim of her own infidelity.

[season555]

02:10 PM on 01/09/2011

She was cheating...

[rmarie]

11:04 PM on 01/11/2011

...and taking his kid around someone who was convicted for domestic abuse. But let's ignore that, because her "privacy was violated". *rolls eyes*

[TruEngineHearing]

12:44 PM on 01/09/2011

Prosecutors are too often ferocious resumé builders, stuffing it full with convictions for - well, whatever they can find. Lots of regular folks have been ruined by this reality. I hope the notoriety of his case does the trick for this guy, so that he has a chance of getting justice, but it should sober us all to know that there are taxpayer funded legal predators out there, looking out for number one.

[novabird]

12:14 PM on 01/09/2011

Wake up Americans. Leon Walker is just another piece of fodder for the burgeoning corporate prison industry in this country. Yes, I do agree that this women is totally off base but the real story here is why this man is being persecuted for this so called "crime" when there are so many terrible people out there committing truly serious and harmful offenses.

By the way, I am a woman and a feminist and I really h-8 the way some women jump on the "I am a victim" bandwagon. We will never take our place as free and equal persons until we utterly stop doing that.

[emperance]

10:32 PM on 01/08/2011

No sympathy for either of these 2 - only for the child.

[NobodySince1980]

05:58 PM on 01/08/2011

Are we missing a large piece to this puzzle? The punishment for the husband does not fit the crime. I have mixed feelings on a spouse reading e-mails. When it comes to contact that is leading to or involved with an affair and the spouse trying to hide that, that's one thing. If it's a spouse who uses it as a means of total domination and power control, to cut their spouse off from the world, especially while that controlling spouse does whatever they want, contacts people of the opposite sex in a manner that is hurtful to their spouse (the very one they are controlling), that is not acceptable. This woman does not fit that case.

I don't agree with her affair, but I can't reasonably judge that. I feel we should execute more self-control and not act on those human, sexual impulses though.

[specialdark]

05:33 PM on 01/08/2011

But in playing the devil’s advocate here…
Is he really guilty of breaking the hacking law? How hard is it to find out a password between man and wife? Yes, with him being an IT Tech it makes him look bad especially if she was using another email account other than the one that they conversed with, then he definitely hacked it. Now finding out her password in that type of situation I can see why she is pursuing it based on violation of privacy. I am not saying that she was right because she had reason to be duplicitous, thus her claim to the invasion of privacy. She seems to be willing to expose her actions in order burn him. They have been caught up trying to get at one another. This case will be interesting and am curious of the outcome and will watch for it.

[specialdark]

05:14 PM on 01/08/2011

Bear with me a minute I am trying to sort this out. She is playing the "victim" role to garner sympathy. Her reasoning for confiding in her 2nd husband is beyond understanding. Leon probably was not the best husband either and he seemed not really ready to marry in the first place, he has issues. Her response to his inability to give her what she wanted should not have been to bring another man into the situation, ESPECIALLY HER EX!. Now she wants to get back at him and "keep him on the team?" The problem I have with this is the fact that if he goes to jail he will not be able to pay any child support and it will definitely hurt his potential for earning a living and of course his relationship with his child will suffer even more. Is that not enough? I truly hope the judge/jury in this trial will be lenient on him. To me both of these immature parents have a long way to go. His immaturity is based on his inability to communicate in person about his feelings. Her immaturity is based on her inability to deal with an issue when she does not get what she wants. Granted he was thinking of the children when he did this and threw in a little spite for cheating. He does not seem to be a bad guy but boy did this backfire on him.

[mplsdiva]

01:49 PM on 01/08/2011

I hope he gets off scott free.

[MorpheusXNYC]

12:32 PM on 01/08/2011

This loathsome, shameless, repugnant, infantile creature is setting back women by 100 years.

She's throwing around the phrase "violated"/"I was violated", invoking shades of rape to cloak herself in the mantle of feminine victimatization in an attempt to garner sympathy.

She is nothing more than an unfaithful, lying sack of self centeredness who is abusing the court system in order to try and change the subject from the fact that she was caught cheating.

The divorce should be granted on his behalf, she should be forced to pay spousal support and he should sue her civilly for this abuse of the legal system.

This absurdity reminds me of when home invading criminals are shot and then sue the homeowner.

[Lorrie Jackson]

10:22 PM on 01/08/2011

SO fanned.