Is this the result of the massive security state in which we live? Does no one have the right to privacy? The NSA is tracking you everywhere you go. Satellites and drones circle above, cops download meta data off your phone, cameras at every intersection. Now this.
(CNN) — Massachusetts’ highest court ruled Wednesday that it is not illegal to secretly photograph underneath a person’s clothing — a practice known as “upskirting” — prompting one prosecutor to call for a revision of state law.
The high court ruled that the practice did not violate the law because the women who were photographed while riding Boston public transportation were not nude or partially nude.
“A female passenger on a MBTA trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing,” wrote Justice Margot Botsford of the state Supreme Judicial Court.
CNN legal analyst Sunny Hostin said the law has not caught up to technology and called it an assault on a woman’s right to privacy.
“I think the courts got it wrong,” Hostin said. “The spirit of the law makes it clear it is about the person’s privacy.”
The ruling stems from the case against Michael Robertson, 32, who was arrested in 2010 and accused of using his cell phone to take pictures and record video up the skirts and dresses of women on the trolley, according to court documents.
Two separate complaints were filed against Robertson with the transit police. Authorities then staged “a decoy operation” to catch Robertson, who was eventually arrested and charged with two counts of attempting to secretly photograph a person in a state of partial nudity. Police observed him point a cell phone video camera up the dress of a female officer, court documents state.
Wednesday’s ruling reversed a previous decision by a lower court, which had denied a motion by Robertson seeking the dismissal of the case, said a statement from the Suffolk County district attorney’s office.
“In sum, we interpret the phrase, ‘a person who is … partially nude’ in the same way that the defendant does, namely, to mean a person who is partially clothed but who has one or more of the private parts of body exposed in plain view at the time that the putative defendant secretly photographs her,” the high court ruled.
The ruling that state law “does not apply to photographing (or videotaping or electronically surveilling) persons who are fully clothed and, in particular, does not reach the type of upskirting that the defendant is charged with attempting to accomplish on the MBTA.”
Prosecutors had argued that the current statute, which prohibits secretly photographing or videotaping a person who is “nude or partially nude,” includes upskirting, according to documents.
But Robertson’s lawyers argued that the female passenger on the trolley was not “nude or partially nude” and was not in a place where she had a reasonable expectation of privacy, according to court documents.
“Every person, male or female, has a right to privacy beneath his or her own clothing,” Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley said in a statement Wednesday. “If the statute as written doesn’t protect that privacy, then I’m urging the Legislature to act rapidly and adjust it so it does.”
Robertson’s lawyer, Michelle Menken, did not return a phone call seeking comment.
Robertson faced misdemeanor charges punishable by up to two and half years in prison.
bb is safe to continue his hobby.
bb, The Younger Years
[img[/img]
.
Gee, I hope flash posts some religious shit here also.
Potter Stewart was nominated to The Supreme Court by Eisenhower.
He is best known for a quote from his opinion in the obscenity case in 1964 ———– he said that “hard-core pornography” was hard to define, but that “I know it when I see it.”.
Today they see it, and can’t define it.
Why is government so incompetent. Why are judges so incompetent? We continue to fall into The Abyss.
bb, We stood start a club. Maybe “Cooter Shooters”. You can be president.
Just is case LLPOH tells me that CNN is too liberal a news source and can’t be trusted… There is an article on FOX about the same thing. I could have pulled the post from there but… Fuck FOX NEWS.
Correction. Just IN case….
Jeez, do women wear skirts anymore? Not around here. Somebody needs to invent a jeans cam.
Without photos….good photos, I can’t really come to a decision. Please present the evidence for review.
for Treemagnet ONLY
[img]https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT1-wB0y8m1EjSt2bdyQq9gbcUO-QrhnAuiQ4OTl_C5otGz77QE8g[/img]
@stucky, now thats what I’m talking about…..
The judge had to rule that upskirts shots are not illegal to support the TSA porn scanners.
Because of those Burka loving terrorists our gropemint wants to see you without clothes.
The only place you have a reasonable expectation of privacy is the public restroom.
Lots of skirt wearing women in Wellington, New Zealand!!
Sanity restored.
(CNN) — Modern-day peeping Toms in Massachusetts, the sorts who get their thrills snapping “upskirt” photos on crowded subways, now have their behavior criminalized.
Gov. Deval Patrick signed a bill Friday, according to his office, making photographing or recording video under a person’s clothing — think down a blouse or up a skirt — a misdemeanor.
“The legislation makes the secret photographing, videotaping, or electronically surveiling of another person’s sexual or other intimate parts, whether under or around a person’s clothing or when a reasonable person would believe that the person’s intimate parts would not be visible to the public, a crime,” Patrick’s office said in a prepared statement.
The crime is punishable by up 2½ years in jail or a fine of up to $5,000.
In addition, the law states that “whoever videotapes or photographs, with the intent to secretly conduct or hide such activity, the sexual or other intimate parts of a child” faces a sentence of 2½ to 5 years and up to a $5,000 fine. The law goes into effect immediately.
this is not new, about 25 years ago, a guy here was arrested and prosecuted for taking pictures of cheerleaders at high school games. seems people noticed he liked to shoot when the girls were jumping around and showing their shorts. that was my favorite part of the game but it didn’t occur to me to do what jealous women advise: take a picture, it’ll last longer.
bb is turning out to be a real perv, hey, bb, when’s our next CS meeting?
Not that ‘perv’ is a bad thing. You’ve all done this, I’m sure: my boss Phil erased the newsprint on a model’s bikini top and drew in big nips with a pencil. I said, Phil, your a pervert. He said, thank you.