A marriage that began in 2005 has ended with a lawsuit alleging sexual assault, battery, false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress, according to the federal case that was heard this week.
Kimberley O’Brien took the stand Tuesday to testify against her husband Kevin Anderson, from whom she filed for divorce from in 2006. Astonishingly, the federal civil case had been litigated for seven years before O’Brien had the ability to take the stand in her defense.
In her suit, O’Brien claims that she and Anderson lived a luxurious lifestyle that included trips to Switzerland and Italy, but their marriage took a turn shortly after they exchanged vows.
According to O’Brien, she was sexually assaulted on her honeymoon in California. O’Brien claims Anderson struck her in the back of the head, tied her up and sexually violated her. She also states that Anderson left her bound overnight.
“You will never tell anyone about this and if you are a good slave this will never happen again,” Anderson allegedly told O’Brien the next morning.
O’Brien also claims that Anderson made her walk around their house naked and told her to refer to him as “master”.
“It was the biggest mistake of my life ever being with this man,” O’Brien said in court.
Husband Claims Mutual Relationship
Anderson said the relationship was nothing more than two consenting adults living out their fantasies. According to him, it was O’Brien who brought the sadomasochist fantasies into the bedroom, and she wanted to be tied up on their honeymoon.
She said, “This is our last night here – let’s go big,” according to Anderson’s attorney Chris Cole. Anderson’s attorney also states that the couple decided on a safe word, but O’Brien never used it during their sexual romp.
Millions of Dollars at Stake
The case has received national attention because of the amount of money at stake. O’Brien is seeking $10 million in damages for her pain and suffering. Anderson’s camp believes O’Brien is simply trying to seek a quick payday.
“This is a case largely driven by revenge and greed,” said Cole.
One of the biggest reasons this case has taken so long is because the couple seemed more interested in a “master-slave” contract than a prenuptial agreement. Family Law Attorney Sean Sullivan said finances and property holdings should always be examined before a couple gets married, especially when a vast amount is involved.
What strikes me most is that this case has been litigated for 7 years. The main reason for this is because there is a marital estate that reaches into the millions. With an estate that large, both sides would have been better served entering into a pre-marital agreement. They could have avoided such prolonged litigation and saved thousands in legal fees by agreeing before this marriage even occurred that there would be an equitable division of the marital estate in the event the marriage broke down.
If two parties are contemplating marriage and the marital estate in question has significant financial resources, then the parties are much better off entering into a pre-marital agreement. Some people feel these are not romantic and it means the marriage is doomed from the start. I look at them in much more of a practical light. I hope the parties live happily ever after and any pre-marital agreement drafted never has to be enacted. But if things do not work out, then a carefully drafted pre-marital agreement can save both parties time and money lost arguing in court.
This will no doubt be a difficult case for jurors to decide on. They are tasked with deciding if these acts that occurred were the result of abuse and coercion or choices made by consenting adults. What is interesting is that this case was brought as a civil case and not a criminal case. If these acts were forced on her as the wife claims, then the husband’s conduct amounts to criminal action. However, if this was indeed shared sexual interests and the parties entered into the acts voluntarily, then the root of this case is decidedly something else entirely.
Related source: Chicago Tribune