RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


RapierFugue -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/6/2011 4:19:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it against the law to be looking *into* people's windows?
Windows are for people to be looking *out of* not for people to be looking *in to.*




That would be correct, if it were one-way or mirrored glass.

It wasn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Popeye, as much as I normally disagree with you, sometimes you do sum things up concisely.

This should have never made it to court and I applaud the guy for pursuing the issue.

He has a right of privacy in his own home. If these women were offended by what they saw all they had to do was not look.


What that means, if your logic is followed through, is that anyone has the "right" to expose themselves to others if their house adjoins a public thoroughfare.

I can't see any court worth the name endorsing that concept.




tazzygirl -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/6/2011 4:23:04 PM)

Intrusion upon Seclusion One who intentionally intrudes upon the solitude or seclusion of another is subject to liability for common-law invasion of privacy. An invasion may involve a physical intrusion into a place where a person has secluded herself, such as the nonconsensual entry into someone's home, office, apartment, or hotel room. Nonphysical intrusions may also give rise to liability when they involve the use of electronic surveillance equipment, including wiretaps, microphones, and video cameras. Alternatively, a person's seclusion may be impermissibly interrupted by persistent and unwelcome telephone calls, or by the occasional window peeper. By imposing liability in such instances, the law seeks to protect a person's tranquility and equilibrium.

Not every intrusion is actionable under this common-law tort. The intrusion must be considered highly offensive to a reasonable person. Creditors are allowed to take action to collect delinquent debts but must do so in a reasonable fashion. Landlords are permitted to demand late rental payments but must do so at reasonable times. A judge or jury determines what is reasonable according to the facts of each case. Individuals have no expectation of privacy in matters that are public. Thus, businesses may examine public criminal records of prospective employees without fear of liability, and photographers may take pictures of movie stars in public places.

.......

The meaning of the term privacy changes according to its legal context. In constitutional law, privacy means the right to make certain fundamental decisions concerning deeply personal matters free from government coercion, intimidation, or regulation. In this sense, privacy is associated with interests in autonomy, dignity, and self-determination. Under the common law, privacy generally means the right to be let alone. In this sense, privacy is associated with seclusion. Under statutory law, privacy often means the right to prevent the nonconsensual disclosure of sensitive, confidential, or discrediting information. In this sense, privacy is associated with secrecy.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Privacy+rights

If you want the expectation of privacy, then keep it private.




rulemylife -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/6/2011 4:52:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Intrusion upon Seclusion One who intentionally intrudes upon the solitude or seclusion of another is subject to liability for common-law invasion of privacy. An invasion may involve a physical intrusion into a place where a person has secluded herself, such as the nonconsensual entry into someone's home, office, apartment, or hotel room. Nonphysical intrusions may also give rise to liability when they involve the use of electronic surveillance equipment, including wiretaps, microphones, and video cameras. Alternatively, a person's seclusion may be impermissibly interrupted by persistent and unwelcome telephone calls, or by the occasional window peeper. By imposing liability in such instances, the law seeks to protect a person's tranquility and equilibrium.

Not every intrusion is actionable under this common-law tort. The intrusion must be considered highly offensive to a reasonable person. Creditors are allowed to take action to collect delinquent debts but must do so in a reasonable fashion. Landlords are permitted to demand late rental payments but must do so at reasonable times. A judge or jury determines what is reasonable according to the facts of each case. Individuals have no expectation of privacy in matters that are public. Thus, businesses may examine public criminal records of prospective employees without fear of liability, and photographers may take pictures of movie stars in public places.

.......

The meaning of the term privacy changes according to its legal context. In constitutional law, privacy means the right to make certain fundamental decisions concerning deeply personal matters free from government coercion, intimidation, or regulation. In this sense, privacy is associated with interests in autonomy, dignity, and self-determination. Under the common law, privacy generally means the right to be let alone. In this sense, privacy is associated with seclusion. Under statutory law, privacy often means the right to prevent the nonconsensual disclosure of sensitive, confidential, or discrediting information. In this sense, privacy is associated with secrecy.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Privacy+rights

If you want the expectation of privacy, then keep it private.


You are very badly misinterpreting what is being said in your link.

It is an endorsement of the right to privacy and you are picking out certain words to imply that somehow it is a pro-active right, that it does not apply unless the person takes active steps to protect their privacy.

You might also take note of the fact your article is focused on civil liability.  The case in question was a criminal charge.







tazzygirl -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/6/2011 4:53:22 PM)

Because there is no privacy issue.




rulemylife -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:12:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Because there is no privacy issue.


I'm not sure what you mean by that.

I have a reasonable expectation of privacy in my own home.

I have no duty to ensure that someone who is looking into my home does not see something they find offensive.

Being that the facts involved here have been pretty limited, we really don't know exactly what took place.  If he did it intentionally for some type of sexual exhibitionism then yes, that would change things.

But I'm assuming that someone who was doing it for that purpose and received lenient treatment by the court would not be appealing the ruling.

This seems to be more a matter of someone who believes he did nothing wrong and is appealing based on principle.






rulemylife -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:33:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RapierFugue

What that means, if your logic is followed through, is that anyone has the "right" to expose themselves to others if their house adjoins a public thoroughfare.

I can't see any court worth the name endorsing that concept.


Then let's take that a step further.

Suppose I am sitting in my house watching a porno and my neighbor is out walking her dog, sees it through the window, and finds it offensive.  Does she have the legal standing to file a lawsuit against me for emotional distress?  Would she be able to file obscenity charges against me?

You are trying to argue it is my responsibility to foresee what others may find offensive and protect them from it.  




LillyBoPeep -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:33:50 AM)

i admit i haven't been following this like a hawk, but it seemed like he was doing something to GET their attention in order for them to look at him. the mother heard a loud rattle and looked to see what it was, NOT to see him in his window.
he seems like an exhibitionist and he's keeping up his fight simply to garner more attention for himself. =p way to go!

if you don't want to be seen, you put up blinds or curtains; even simple sheers would've offered enough of a screen for people simply walking by.




RapierFugue -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:37:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Suppose I am sitting in my house


Exactly. Which he wasn't.

Your logic's fundamentally flawed, IMHO. But we shall see - if the court wishes to correct an earlier mistake then they'll be only too happy to do so, I would think.

I wouldn't hold your breath though.





RapierFugue -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:39:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep
even simple sheers

Are those what we Brits call "net curtains" or "nets"?

If so, that's a much sexier name for them :)

Although it does then ruin one of my fave quotes: "Life is divided into the Haves, and the Have-Nets" ;)




rulemylife -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 8:53:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RapierFugue


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Suppose I am sitting in my house


Exactly. Which he wasn't.

Your logic's fundamentally flawed, IMHO. But we shall see - if the court wishes to correct an earlier mistake then they'll be only too happy to do so, I would think.

I wouldn't hold your breath though.




My logic is fundamentally flawed in what way?

Because he was not sitting but standing, or walking in his own house?

Really, or am I misunderstanding you?




rulemylife -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:02:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep

i admit i haven't been following this like a hawk, but it seemed like he was doing something to GET their attention in order for them to look at him. the mother heard a loud rattle and looked to see what it was, NOT to see him in his window.
he seems like an exhibitionist and he's keeping up his fight simply to garner more attention for himself. =p way to go!

if you don't want to be seen, you put up blinds or curtains; even simple sheers would've offered enough of a screen for people simply walking by.



As I've said before, the details here are sketchy.  The loud rattle she heard could have been him dropping something he was carrying or may not even have come from his house.

As for your second point, the reverse can be argued.

If you don't want to see something you might be offended by then don't be looking into other people's homes. 




LadyPact -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:05:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Then let's take that a step further.

OK, let's do that.

quote:

Suppose I am sitting in my house watching a porno and my neighbor is out walking her dog, sees it through the window, and finds it offensive.  Does she have the legal standing to file a lawsuit against me for emotional distress?  Would she be able to file obscenity charges against me?

You are trying to argue it is my responsibility to foresee what others may find offensive and protect them from it.  


Instead of you sitting down to watch a porno, let's say you pushed your tv up against your window so it was facing out towards the path that kids were walking to get to the bus stop.  Then, you made sufficient noise to make sure it got other people's attention.  Still not your responsibility?




LillyBoPeep -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:06:12 AM)

yep, Rapier -- sheers and nets are basically the same thing ^_^




LillyBoPeep -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:12:39 AM)

@rulemylife -- if his house was not in a major point of traffic, if he wasn't standing DIRECTLY at his window so as to be seen clearly, if he wasn't making noise to get attention. IF HE HAD A SIMPLE SET OF CURTAINS UP -- no harm no foul.
if he was taking reasonable measures to avoid being seen, it would be a different story. but it seems like this person WANTS to be seen and is willfully ignorant of means in which to prevent himself from being seen. simply saying "well don't look" is a cop-out argument, plain and simple; to reassign blame from where it properly belongs.

sure the reverse could be argued, but right to privacy is, in many ways, on you to enforce. no one is responsible for enforcing his right to privacy -- he could've done that himself with about $5 of cheap fabric and a curtain rod. like it or not, when you live with other people, you have to think about their rights, too.

and of course, more than likely, this person is counting on people to get indignant at his apparently "loss of right to privacy" to keep this farce going. =p




RapierFugue -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:14:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep

yep, Rapier -- sheers and nets are basically the same thing ^_^


Oh cool! I'm going to call them that from now on then, coz it's a much sexier name :)

Plus I want to see the look on people's faces when I say "I'm washing my sheers today!".




RapierFugue -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 9:22:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
If you don't want to see something you might be offended by then don't be looking into other people's homes. 

You've (once again) missed the point; as the evidence stands, it would appear they weren't choosing to look "into" someone else's home, the person already in that home decided to draw attention to themselves. And even if they weren’t, there are limits to what a person can reasonably do when stood in plain view, even if within their own home.

Now obviously, if you’re in the middle of Bunghole Nowhere, centred in 100 square miles of your own lands then you can do pretty much whatever you want to. Equally obviously, if you're in any kind of village, town or city environment then there are limits to the extent you can exercise your “freedom of expression”; we all accept compromises and limits on certain of our actions as the price for living in a society. Noise laws, pollution laws, etc. This is no different.

As I say, if one follows your logic then, as I see LP has already picked up on, it would mean you can do/show virtually anything you like to the world outside, so long as the thing you're showing/projecting from is within your house. The law doesn't work that way, certainly not in the UK and, I'm fairly certain, not in the US either.




Jaybeee -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 11:39:17 AM)

I once had similar experience with kids but fully clothed, I was having some drinks in town and the particular pub was smack next door to some subterranean 'dive' flats. My girlfriend gave me a call and as I couldn't hear myself think in the pub, I went out to chat to her.

It was a cold night and I paced back and forth, and a couple of kids in a window in one of the flats kept staring at me, I winked and they went ballistic, I told me girlfriend and she told me to wave out of politeness, which I did. Anyway, so about 20 mins later, I'd walked past the same spot at least a dozen times to keep warm in the chilly evening, the kids intermittently appearing trying to raise my attention, and then their Dad comes out the front door, interrupting my conversation with,

"Excuse me, do you mind moving on?" I ask my girlfriend to hold on while I find out what this prick wants.

"I beg your pardon?"

"Look, my kids are here and I don't want them disturbed, could you please go back in the pub or someplace else?"

At this point I'm outraged...

"Mate, get it right, this is a public footpath!! You interrupted my conversation for this?

"I'm gonna have a word with the publican, you won't be able to drink there again!"

"Go fuck yourself, you bought a house next to a pub, it's a Friday night, and as a man you ought to know better than that, don't fucking bother me again with your crap!"

The dumb bastard didn't show his face again. Can't believe how stupid some people are.
"




Aylee -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 2:00:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaybeee

"Look, my kids are here and I don't want them disturbed, could you please go back in the pub or someplace else?"



It sounds like the kids were getting worked up and HE did not want their excitement disturbing him.  Kind of like trying to get the truck driver to blow the air horn when you were going past them as a kid on a car trip. 




Termyn8or -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 2:08:19 PM)

I agree JB. Fuck the twit.

That is a different situation, but.........

What if you were naked ? This would be the opposite situation, looking out of a window instead of in.

T




Jaybeee -> RE: Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home (1/7/2011 2:22:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

I agree JB. Fuck the twit.

That is a different situation, but.........

What if you were naked ? This would be the opposite situation, looking out of a window instead of in.

T


Well, what's the law here? They say an Englishman's home is his castle, and during the warmer months I commonly strut around the place without a stitch. I have a nosy neighbour next door, some 50yr old housewife whom I've noticed peering through her cove window into mine. I have net curtains like most people, BUT if she sees me sporting a hard-on through them, good luck to her.

But when my cleaner turns up, I at LEAST put on a towel, though I daresay at her age she wouldn't mind the view...

All this really depends on the law, and it's an interesting dilemma. I presume it falls on the side of "common" sense, ie if you take all reasonable precautions to shield the antics in your home from view, then nobody can hassle you.

I've signed for packages a few times just wearing boxers, once it was with a female delivery driver, didn't bother her and it doesn't bother me.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875