If up skirts are wrong only due to the wording of the law then the law needs to be changed.

 

Hopefully none of you are defending those photos being taken.

This is beyond ridiculous.

Ah, the old "she was asking for it; just look how she's dressed" bit.

 

So when the wind picks up when your in your skirt and everyone sees the goodies you gonna arrest mother nature?

So when the wind picks up when your in your skirt and everyone sees the goodies you gonna arrest mother nature?

 

My insurance guy would say "that's an act of God" so it's not covered. :sssh:

I always assumed the law said if there would be no assumption of privacy, then you couldn't go after someone for pictures. So I would say you should be able assume privacy in a bathroom stall, possibly sun tanning in your back yard if you have privacy fences, but I am surprised that the law wouldn't say a skirt assumes privacy.

 

Getslow, is the assumption of privacy part not correct?

There's definitely something wrong with it.

 

But once again we have a headline problem. The act is considered licit under THIS PARTICULAR STATUTE. The law needs to be rewritten to ban this as well.

 

"In a state of partial nudity" is not a phrase I would have any idea what to do with were I trying to defend this law... but I know exactly how I'd tear it down, which is just what this lawyer did.

 

If I recall properly, several states have previously re-written their statutes to make this behavior illegal. The Mass. legislature had not done so yet (but I'm sure they will now).

So when the wind picks up when your in your skirt and everyone sees the goodies you gonna arrest mother nature?

 

Totally different.

What limit if any is there on taking photos?

Can I stand on my roof and take pictures of the neighbor laying out tanning in her enclosed back yard?

If taking photo's up skirts is OK, can someone go in and take photo's under bathroom stalls? Public Place right?

 

If you're on your own property you can do whatever you want. If you're on the public right-of-way (street, sidewalk) then you're good. A "public place" — businesses and such — has different rules for photography, most requiring advance permission for doing any kind of photography. The rise of camera phones has changed the game a lot, though, and the laws haven't kept pace with technology.

 

Taking pics of your neighbor sunbathing is probably something that would fall to street justice once she tells her husband what you were doing.

Although I don't agree with what the guy did, in a legal arena you obviously can compare the two.

 

I would think that the expectation of privacy would come into play. At a beach you don't expect privacy but I believe taking pictures of your undergarments is an invasion of privacy. Isn't there something similar with electronic communications and privacy?

Peeping Tom, or voyeurism statutes require that for voyeurism to occur, the victim must have been in a place where he or she would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as within their own home, a hotel room, a public restroom, or the like. Further, the voyeurism must be deliberate.

 

I don't see why upskirt photos or even upskirt peeking would not be considered unlawful behavior if the state has a peeping Tom law.

Joking joking. Yeah it's creepy.

 

But can they make taking a picture of something visible in a public space illegal?

 

Kind of a broad question, but for some reasons, yes.

Well, all I got to say is, the first guy that tries to take a picture to see my goodies under MY skirt is gonna get a mouth full of fist!:rage:

I think there might be some risk of people conflating 'reasonable expectation of privacy' as it is being used here with the way that it is used under the 4th Amendment when it comes to searches and seizures conducted by a State/Federal actor (which is probably how it's used more often). Maybe I'm misreading it, but I think that the two concepts aren't necessarily the same in all instances (though there are obviously lots of areas that would be covered under both in a given situation).

I am not surprised that the majority of men see nothing wrong with this. Maybe when your daughter's privates end up on social media you will sing a different tune.

I deffinatly see something wrong with it.

 

Id kill the guy if he did it to a relative of mine.

 

I just said the thing about my pants because, well I like people shoving things down there....just sayin

Well, all I got to say is, the first guy that tries to take a picture to see my goodies under MY skirt is gonna get a mouth full of fist!:rage:

Or a mouthful of something.