Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have no way of telling what was going through his mind. This is difficult because of that, but four times does seem like a lot. Why didn't the parents do anything earlier? Why did the man (even though he has the right to keep his blinds open) stand there after it happened continually?
People having sex or undressing.
If they do not close the curtains or blinds are breaking the law.
You can view anything and everything from a legal place.(not trespassing)
Even if you use a telescope or binoculars as they can not see threw the curtains, blinds or walls.
Was he morally wrong? Maybe.
Did he break any laws? No
Last edited by snofarmer; 12-05-2011 at 10:26 AM..
IMHO the "observer" should be free to go, and put on a suspected pedophile watch list.
The parents of the girl should be charged with indecent exposure, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and given a sentence of probation.
That would serve the best interest of justice IMHO.
Because if you leave your blinds wide open while running around naked, that should be prosecuted the same way as if you ran around your front yard. Since the girl is a minor, it's up to the parents to prevent this from happening. Since that's not always possible, they should only be slapped on the wrist for it, and that's it.
Like it or not, we cannot go down the slippery slope of prosecuting someone for looking at something in what amounts to plain view. Sick pervert or not.
It is illegal to have kiddy porn on your computer. Just the act of looking at kiddie porn is illegal. It does not matter if they are not photos of actual children. Looking at a drawing depicting kiddie porn is illegal.
So, surely looking out your window at a real young girl naked is illegal.
Again, I have read that the majority of pedophiles do not escalate, but just stay at home, doing their thing while looking at pictures of young kids. You may say it is unfair to arrest them for doing that because they have offended no one, but that's the law as it stands.
I think that law came from the understanding that artistic or photoshopped renditions can be so realistic that it is extremely difficult, maybe impossible, to tell if the subject is a real child or not. If it were a real child, taking such a photo would, naturally, be a legal violation. So the viewer of such porn would be in some way, aiding and abetting a crime. If you have knowledge of a crime being committed and do not report it, you are in violation.
Anyway, that's my understanding. In some ways it sounds unfair, but after the reasoning was explained to me, I understand.
I would think a reasonable person would close the blinds and educ sate her daughter after the first time, but it sounds like mom continued to allow the kid to undress in front of an open window so she could watch the neighbor watching.
The daughter must have liked what she was doing, since stepping a foot or two to the side would put her out of view of a window.
Also, the guy is a pediatrician. He spends 40 hours a week with naked children, why would he want to peek at another one through the window...
The whole thing makes no sense on both sides...
It is illegal to have kiddy porn on your computer. Just the act of looking at kiddie porn is illegal. It does not matter if they are not photos of actual children. Looking at a drawing depicting kiddie porn is illegal.
So, surely looking out your window at a real young girl naked is illegal.
Again, I have read that the majority of pedophiles do not escalate, but just stay at home, doing their thing while looking at pictures of young kids. You may say it is unfair to arrest them for doing that because they have offended no one, but that's the law as it stands.
I think that law came from the understanding that artistic or photoshopped renditions can be so realistic that it is extremely difficult, maybe impossible, to tell if the subject is a real child or not. If it were a real child, taking such a photo would, naturally, be a legal violation. So the viewer of such porn would be in some way, aiding and abetting a crime. If you have knowledge of a crime being committed and do not report it, you are in violation.
Anyway, that's my understanding. In some ways it sounds unfair, but after the reasoning was explained to me, I understand.
I realize your not defending these laws, just stating your understanding of them,but Some of these laws seem silly.
I live near the beach. We have a lot of Europeans that come here, and many times they just let heir children run around naked. Most of the children are probably 5 or younger. Does that mean that everyone that walked By the kids playing on the beach are in violation of the law?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
