Man Pleads Guilty in Louisiana

Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by LuckySo-n-So, Jul 18, 2009.

  1. LuckySo-n-So

    LuckySo-n-So TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    449
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    2theadvocate.com | News | Photo taker says he’s guilty — Baton Rouge, LA

    As with the recent post concerning the state of Texas, this has nothing to do with the moral fiber of the "offender."

    I just find it difficult that someone can be persuaded to plead guilty to taking photographs in a public place.

    What follows is Louisiana's "Video Voyeurism" law. It was one of the first in the nation (it also inspired a bad Lifetime movie starring Angie Harmon).

    This is a horribly written law, but being a VERY conservative state like Texas, there is little chance of it being re-written.

     
  2. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,443
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Well look at it this way. Your a pedophile who has been caught. You have a large amount of photographs on you camera and video camera of 10-12 year old girls breasts and buttocks and the authorities found thousands of similar and perhaps worse photos on your computer. Add to that he admitted that he took these photos of little girls for sexual arousal and you have a classic pedophile.

    Now ask yourself, would you want a court trial, open to the public, with the prosecutor bringing in and showing all of that evidence in open court? Even if the photos are redacted the purpose is obvious to everyone that is present. Very few cases like this ever goes to court. This is not a case remotely related to photography, it is a case of pedophilia that not only has relationship to not only photography, and videography, but computers as well. They were just tools that this person used to create the images that he lusted for.
     
  3. LuckySo-n-So

    LuckySo-n-So TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    449
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    While the guy may in fact be a pedophile, he has never been arrested or charged with being such. No "explicit" child pornography was ever found on his computer or in his home or person. He was arrested at a local water park for taking the photos, which led to the search and subsequent admission of guilt.

    While we all may agree that this guy is a perv and has severe mental problems, I don't believe that he committed a crime. I think he had poor legal advice and lacked the will or financial means to take this through the courts, as you implied in your post.

    It has everything to do with photography, or "taking photos" if you will. That's why the guy was arrested.

    Also, according to LA law, anyone who views or transmits the Erin Andrews videos is subject to arrest, $10,000 fine, prison, and registration as a sex offender.
     
  4. needhelpeeps

    needhelpeeps TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    I despise pedaphiles with a passion. If someone is caught intentionally downloading child porn or ordering it, I am officially done with that person and will not lose any sleep if the person is locked up forever. However, laws like this have too much subjectivity and room for abuse. I know of too many people who have been persecuted for reasons that have nothing to do with them being criminals. A few years ago a disagreement with my boss (a small biz owner) and a city council member resulted in a surprise fire inspection and all kind of changes demanded. The councilman bragged about it to several people. Always before the building was just fine, so no I do not think it was a coincidence along with his bragging and the fact that he told my boss he was going to make him sorry right before it happened. Anyway, I don't want to risk a photographer being harassed just for taking photos. Of course, a jury should sort things out but once you've made the paper being arrested for something like this, the damage is already done to your reputation and could easily cost someone his or her small business or future job opportunities.

    If someone is taking pictures of little kids near my house though they better watch out. The police might not arrest them but a mob of parents will kick some ass.
     
  5. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,443
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    So if a man uses a 20oz framing hammer to smack his wife upside the head is it an assault on the construction industry or construction workers rights?

    The photography here was a tool. Walk down the street with a handgun in your hand and a ski mask in the other, you get noticed. Go to a water park with a camera and photograph other peoples little girls breasts and buttocks you might get notice. Invade someone's right to privacy, make an illegal recording and then transmit it or sell it, you might get noticed.

    The followup investigation is what got him arrested.

    If you possess or transport a stolen vehicle it is a criminal act. Are you suggesting that possessing or transporting an illegally recorded and released video does not rise to the level of a criminal act?
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2009
  6. Alpha

    Alpha Troll Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,454
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    There are some laws that are used as a work around of other laws. For example, the deportation of people who can't be convicted of terrorism. If this is indeed one of those, then I disagree with it in principle, for the same reason I disagree with the aforementioned deportation.

    However, and this is a big however. The burden of proof in this law stated plainly. It must be proved that the recordings are for a "lewd and lascivious purpose." I would say that is a relatively high bar as burdens of proof go. Intent is always a tough one. Moreover, remember that this is a criminal law and the usual "beyond a reasonable doubt" bar still exists. As such, in order to be convicted of this crime, one has to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the recordings are for a "lewd and lascivious purpose." I think that's a fair burden of proof.

    In cases like these, jurors do tend to be inherently prosecution biased due to the charges. In fact, they are in a lot of criminal cases, but especially sex crimes. But I don't see anything legally fishy about the burden of proof here.

    I work in the legal field, btw.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

man arested for taking pictures of girls at a waterpark