- Messages
- 1,100
- Edit My Images
- No
I was watching one of those street crime type programmes last night, the ones where they splice together a load of CCTV footage mixed with camera crews following officers around. I don't know the name of the show but it was narrated by Jamie Theakston.
One of the crimes was to do with a young girl in a shopping centre. She was wearing a very short skirt and had bent over to pick something up. While she was doing this a guy took a photo on his mobile phone, presumably looking up her skirt (they didn't actually say) and she complained to security, who then called the police.
In the round-up at the end of the programme they said that the guy admitted taking the photo and was found guilty of outraging public decency. He was given a conditional discharge.
Now I don't condone that sort of behaviour, obviously, but what law has he actually broken? I realise he wasn't in a public place, what with shopping centres being private property, but taking photos on private property when asked not to do so counts as trespass. And he wasn't charged with trespass.
Given the nature of the charge I assume it would still have applied if he'd been in public. If the court considers him to have taken an indecent photo, and the photo he took was of the girl, then wasn't the girl commiting indecency too?
Paparazzi often go so far as to physically stick their lenses up the skirts of glamour models arriving at posh clubs/parties. How come they don't get charged with outraging public decency? The practice even has a name - upskirting.
As I said, I'm not condoning what the guy did, but I'm having trouble seeing where it's actually illegal. in the UK a photo is legal if you were standing* in a public place when you took it, the only exception I know of being the use of telephoto lenses to pry into private property, which still isn't technically illegal.
*By standing I assume the law covers crouching, sitting etc.
One of the crimes was to do with a young girl in a shopping centre. She was wearing a very short skirt and had bent over to pick something up. While she was doing this a guy took a photo on his mobile phone, presumably looking up her skirt (they didn't actually say) and she complained to security, who then called the police.
In the round-up at the end of the programme they said that the guy admitted taking the photo and was found guilty of outraging public decency. He was given a conditional discharge.
Now I don't condone that sort of behaviour, obviously, but what law has he actually broken? I realise he wasn't in a public place, what with shopping centres being private property, but taking photos on private property when asked not to do so counts as trespass. And he wasn't charged with trespass.
Given the nature of the charge I assume it would still have applied if he'd been in public. If the court considers him to have taken an indecent photo, and the photo he took was of the girl, then wasn't the girl commiting indecency too?
Paparazzi often go so far as to physically stick their lenses up the skirts of glamour models arriving at posh clubs/parties. How come they don't get charged with outraging public decency? The practice even has a name - upskirting.
As I said, I'm not condoning what the guy did, but I'm having trouble seeing where it's actually illegal. in the UK a photo is legal if you were standing* in a public place when you took it, the only exception I know of being the use of telephoto lenses to pry into private property, which still isn't technically illegal.
*By standing I assume the law covers crouching, sitting etc.