Did the gold digger commit aggression when she baited and trapped him into saying the things she knew he would say, and knowing how they would be interpreted by the listeners, and recording them without his consent.
Since the first property is self, and we all do believe that we own that which we produce and improve, that would include our speech by some definitions. He believed he was speaking privately.
In the less strict interpretation that most libertarians use, she was not an aggressor. By others, she was an aggressor for violating that which he produced through fraudulent means.
These are the slippery questions that, as libertarians, we don't answer well.
Fortunately, most of us don't believe they necessarily need to be answered directly, but instead addressed by the "witnesses" in the form of "taking a side" and supporting that side.
The Philosophy Of Liberty -
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: