Secretly filming up a woman’s skirt ruled legal

Jazzy

Forum Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
60,787
Location
Vermont
Source
A US court has ruled it is legal to film up a woman's skirt without consent due to a "gap" in the law surrounding invasion of privacy.

Brandon Lee Gary was prosecuted in 2013 on a single count of "unlawful eavesdropping and surveillance" after he was witnessed several times on CCTV footage taking video recordings with a mobile phone beneath the skirt of a customer while she was shopping.

Gary, who was employed by the supermarket when the filming occurred, admitted to the charge at a trial in Houston County Superior court where he was found guilty.

A spilt ruling at Georgia's Court of Appeal on 15 July reversed the invasion of privacy conviction against a Gary, after he appealed on the basis that he did not violate state law as it is written, the Atlanta Journal Constitution reports.

Gary was prosecuted under Georgia's Invasion of Privacy Act, making it illegal to observe, photograph or film the activities of another person without consent when they occur "in any private place and out of public view".

The appeal, in which Gary asked for a new trial, argued that he had not broken the law as he had filmed the woman in a public place.

The court ruled in his favour despite a lower court ruling that Gary's conduct was “patently offensive” and that “a woman walking and shopping in a public place has a reasonable expectation of privacy on the area of her body concealed by her clothing".
Thoughts?
 

Kaunisto

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,648
Location
Finland
Creepy, but illegal? Apparently not. Should it be? Probably.
But that's pretty difficult law to choose a wording for that stops this kind of thing but doesn't limit reasonable rights.
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,092
Location
North Carolina
Creepy, but illegal? Apparently not. Should it be? Probably. But that's pretty difficult law to choose a wording for that stops this kind of thing but doesn't limit reasonable rights.
And therein lies the rub: where's the line between 'creepy but legal' and flat-out illegal? Unfortunately, this is one of those situations where no one has written a law dealing with this because no one anticipated a situation such as this. Odds are, this is headed to SCOTUS at some point and if their track record on privacy in public is anything to go by, I'm not sure I'd want to place a bet either way.
 

Worldwide

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,259
Location
Ireland
The court system in any country is suppose to rule in the best interest of the people that it serves. These judges are paid way too much to not apply common sense to the laws that are suppose to protect citizens.
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,092
Location
North Carolina
The court system in any country is suppose to rule in the best interest of the people that it serves. These judges are paid way too much to not apply common sense to the laws that are suppose to protect citizens.
I don't think its' that, @Worldwide , as its' just a failure of imagination on the part of the courts and the legislature to anticipate things like this.
 
Top Bottom