further supports this result. See Kahn, 471 F.2d at 194. Furthermore, this is not a situation where a defendant merely confided in his spouse that he was planning to commit a crime, but rather involves coercion, manipulation, and physical abuse over several months. The recorded conversation is not defendant’s initial disclosure confiding in his wife that he was planning on a committing a crime but rather was a conversation recorded by defendant’s wife in which defendant and defendant’s wife argue about defendant’s plan and defendant’s wife’s participation, or lack of participation, in it. Indeed, defendant’s wife recorded this conversation so that she could show that she was not involved in the crime should defendant try to implicate her in the crime. Cf. Westmoreland, 312 F.3d at 307 (<HOLDING>). This situation is more akin to the
holding that the inadvertent disclosure of a privileged document does not waive the attorneyclient privilege if attorney took all reasonable steps to avoid disclosure and asserted the privilege as soon as the disclosure became known holding that marital communications which arise from an act of violence by a spouse committed against the children of either spouse should constitute an exception to the marital privilege because such communications fail to satisfy the conditions underlying the creation of the privilege recognizing a childabuse exception to marital communications privilege holding that the initial disclosure of a crime to one spouses without more is covered by the marital communications privilege holding attorneyclient privilege protects disclosure of communications but does not protect client from disclosure of underlying facts