“Former teacher Brian Presken, 32, was accused of using a mirror to look under a woman’s skirt last summer at Barnes & Noble Booksellers on Airport Boulevard in Pensacola.

“Defense attorney Katheryne Snowden argued that the voyeurism charge should be dropped because Presken’s accuser didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place under Florida law.

“The law under which Presken was charged states, ‘It is illegal to secretly observe someone with lewd, lascivious and indecent intent in a dwelling, structure or conveyance, and when such locations provide a reasonable expectation of privacy.’

“Snowden said the statute her client is charged under — 810.14 — doesn’t define the phrase ‘reasonable expectation of privacy.’

“Judge George J. Roark III agreed and dismissed the charge Friday afternoon.”

The feminists are up in arms over this case, and at least as it is explained in this newspaper article, I can’t blame them. A woman goes to a Barnes & Noble bookstore, a man apparently uses a mirror to look under her skirt, and his attorney argues that it’s okay because she was in a public place and thus “didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy”?!

That is an outrageous claim, but defense attorneys say all sorts of things, so I don’t worry about that too much. What is troublesome is that the judge agreed and dismissed the charges. Do they really expect us to believe that just because a woman is in a public place it is okay to use a mirror to look up her skirt?

Another interesting part of the story is this — “Assistant State Attorney Greg Marcille said the ruling will not be appealed. ‘We intend to ask the Legislature in next year’s session to consider amending the statute to cover situations such as what occurred in this case.'”

Here we have a quirk in the law, and the legislature will probably fix it ASAP. While I would agree with Marcille in this case, it shows you what good politics feminism is, and how quickly legislators and officials often respond to women’s concerns. The full article is Voyeurism charge tossed (Pensacola News Journal, 5/17/08).

Vanessa Valenti of www.feministing.com wrote about this decision with considerable dissatisfaction in her recent blog post ‘Peeping Toms’ gain popularity in the courts.

Glenn Sacks, www.GlennSacks.com

[Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]

Be Sociable, Share!