From Fox News website:
OKLAHOMA CITY — A man accused of using a camera to take pictures under the skirt of an unsuspecting 16-year-old girl at a Tulsa store did not commit a crime, a state appeals court has ruled.
>:( you got to be kidding- and the girl is a minor
What exactly DID he commit then? I can't see where anyone would condone that!
(I tell you ............................this world is going to hell in a hand basket!!)(http://www.rightnation.us/forums/style_emoticons/default/hairpull.gif)
with three handles
I would call it invasion of privacy or is that a crime?
wow I can't believe that ......but with the week that i have had nothing suprises me anymore.
And I suppose if someone standing by took the guys camera and smashed it, which is what I would be prone to do in that situation, they would probably be carted off in a police care for destruction of private property. In the good old days, this guy would have ended up out behind the barn with the kids, father, brothers, uncles....somebody.
You mean even if the parents pressed charges nothing can happen to him. If that was my daughter, boy you had better watch out!! My husband would have, well if you know Jeff and how protective he is of his girls, you know what he would have done. Of course, he isn't a fighter, so his gun would have been loaded!!! :laugh: :laugh:
This seems to be another case of the law having no respect for the victim while the offender gets all the respect.
The guy is 34 and girl 16.
Below is the story from the Oklahoma City Oklahoman.
The appeals court ruled 4-1 in favor of the offender but the basis for their decision really sounds absurd.
I would think it could be kicked up to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, but 4-1 is pretty heavy.
The appeals court is saying the 16 year old was not in a place to have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
She was in a Target store.
http://newsok.com/article/3215292/
It seems to me that would come under some child pornograhy law. Or indecency with a minor. I think a good caneing would be in order for this guy.
Frank
Me, too. Are you telling me because they are in a public place that they're privacy is no longer theirs? I don't really understand that.