| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 2:25:18 PM |
True. But from what I can tell from the OP no recording had yet taken place. He was caught setting it up. At that point no crime had taken place. ~Sneak65
Well, he was caught setting the camera up. Maybe there was another tape he installed? Maybe there is one in the bathroom, living room, etc. There is no guarantee that no crime has taken place. Actually, he was caught committing a crime which was an attempt to invade privacy. It was more than thought crime. The only difference is he was caught in the act! | |
|
| |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 2:46:24 PM | Oh I totally agree. But until something else is found he has done nothing wrong. The act of setting up a camera is not a crime. Especially when he was invited into the home in the first place.
No privacy has been invaded until the camera is turned on. To charge him before that happens is a thought crime. We simply cannot charge people for thought crimes.
Simply being caught in the act is not a crime. Because we do not know what the "act" is. Setting up a camera is not a crime. Simple as that. Would be the same as charging someone with murder simply because they loaded a gun.
What crime do you feel he commited?
The dude is obviously sick and should get the boot. But trying to charge him with something will be an exercise in futility. Call the police and file a report. Change the locks.. etc etc... | |
|
| |
| |
Jim978
|
Joined: 7/15/2008
Msg: 31 | |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 3:24:49 PM |
True. But from what I can tell from the OP no recording had yet taken place. He was caught setting it up. At that point no crime had taken place. We cannot arrest people for thought crimes. At least not yet. Hence there is no law to charge him with.
??? The idea that no recording had taken place yet doesn't mean that no crime was committed. Perhaps you've heard of references to "Attempted murder" or "Conspiracy to commit...". A person doesn't have to complete the act for it to be a crime. Going to someone's house/apartment, opening the door, going inside and installing video cameras isn't a "thought". It's an action so the "thought crimes" claim doesn't hold much water. | |
|
| |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 3:30:25 PM |
Oh I totally agree. But until something else is found he has done nothing wrong. The act of setting up a camera is not a crime. Especially when he was invited into the home in the first place.
No privacy has been invaded until the camera is turned on. To charge him before that happens is a thought crime. We simply cannot charge people for thought crimes.
Hello? He made reference to something that occurred in her house, something he was NOT present for and had NO prior knowledge of. He was CAUGHT installing a small camera in her BEDROOM without her CONSENT OR KNOWLEDGE. If he was so “concerned” for her safety, then why not install an alarm with a monitoring service, put up cameras on the OUTSIDE of the house, or get her a big ass dog? This is NOT an episode of The Freakin’ Untouchables here; we don’t need Perry Mason and Della Street to figure this one out. It’s the case of the Peepin’ Perv, Matlock. | |
|
| |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 3:37:56 PM | You are totally missing the point. This was not a stranger who broke in. This was the boyfriend with a key. He was allowed into the home so it is quite different than simply walking into a random home and doing the same thing.
Comparing it to attempted muder or conspiracy to commit is disengenuous at best. Attempted means a crime has been "attempted". Setting up a camera is not a crime. It is as simple as that. You cannot prove what his intentions were. You cannot prove he wasnt going to inform her when she got home.
So tell me then. What charge would he be brought up on? No one has yet identified the crime. No ones privacy had been invaded up to that point. If I bring my cam over to my GF's when she is not home and I set it up so I can chat with my buddies am I suddenly guily of invasion of her privacy? How is this possible if her image never appears to the camera?
You may disagree but you are wrong. Unless you can point to a particular crime he has commited then the only thing you can charge him with is a thought crime. Which as stated before does not happen today.
I can think about murdering hundreds of people. I can write stories about it. I can even buy and load as many legal guns as I can afford. But until an actual crime has taken place there is nothing that can be done. Now if I begin to threaten people with death. I begin to wave my guns around in public. Then yes I am commiting a crime and should be arrested. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 3:45:10 PM |
This was not a thought crime though. He was caught in the act. If someone was caught in the act of robbery or stealing ,but had not been able to actually steal anything yet, then they are still charged with a crime.
Caught in what act? Setting up a camera? That is not a crime. Had he broke into her house and did it then yes a crime has been commited. But the crime would be breaking in.
Now if he set up the camera then activated it without her consent. Then yes he has now invaded her privacy.
Just as you cannot charge someone with theft until they leave the store. Just as you cannot arrest someone just because they put something in there bag. They could have every intention of paying for the item.
Still waiting for someone to tell me what crime has taken place. Other than the fact the guy is a dirty rat. But dont believe me. Call the law society and ask them. They will tell you the same thing I am.
| |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 3:53:38 PM |
Caught in what act? Setting up a camera? That is not a crime. Had he broke into her house and did it then yes a crime has been committed. But the crime would be breaking in.
Now if he set up the camera then activated it without her consent. Then yes he has now invaded her privacy.
He may of had a key but it was not his residence and he had no permission to set up a camera without her consent. Therein lies the crime.
Just as you cannot charge someone with theft until they leave the store.
Actually yes you can. They are charged with attempted theft. One of my nephews got caught doing this and he had not left the store yet. He was charged and convicted of attempted theft. | |
|
Jim978
|
Joined: 7/15/2008
Msg: 38 | |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:08:44 PM |
You are totally missing the point. This was not a stranger who broke in. This was the boyfriend with a key. He was allowed into the home so it is quite different than simply walking into a random home and doing the same thing.
Now you are just being ridiculous Whether he had a key or not is irrelevant. He wasn't given a key to go in and setup cameras without her knowledge. If I give someone a key to my home so that they can feed and walk my dog while I'm out of town for the weekend it doesn't grant them persmission to take my TV set. If they did it would still be theft. Having a key inplies only that you have access for what the owner of the property has granted you permission to do. Nothing more.
Comparing it to attempted muder or conspiracy to commit is disengenuous at best. Attempted means a crime has been "attempted". Setting up a camera is not a crime. It is as simple as that. You cannot prove what his intentions were. You cannot prove he wasnt going to inform her when she got home.
Perhaps you should refer to the previous pages where I specifically listed the FL statute on video voyeurism. What possible reason could one have for sneaking into someone's home while they aren't there and installing hidden cameras into their bedroom without their knowledge that wouldn't be a crime? That's not to say that there aren't any possible legitimate reasons but that's up to the people conducting the investigation and prosecuting (if it got that far) to determine.
So tell me then. What charge would he be brought up on? No one has yet identified the crime. No ones privacy had been invaded up to that point. If I bring my cam over to my GF's when she is not home and I set it up so I can chat with my buddies am I suddenly guily of invasion of her privacy? How is this possible if her image never appears to the camera?
If your g/f called the police to report it as a crime it would be up to the police to determine if a crime occured there or not. But if you had hidden the camera in a wall in her bedroom the police would certianly be suspicious of your claims that your intent was to chat with your buddies. And when they charge you with the crime you'd have to convince a very skeptical jury of your intent because they aren't going to buy the idea that the camera was hidden in a bedroom for your daily chats.
You may disagree but you are wrong. Unless you can point to a particular crime he has commited then the only thing you can charge him with is a thought crime. Which as stated before does not happen today.
And your claim of others being wrong is based on how many years of service in Law Enforcement? As a former LEO I can tell you that I've arrested people and they've gone to prison for less. You apparently don't comprehend what the term "thought crime" means.
I can think about murdering hundreds of people. I can write stories about it. I can even buy and load as many legal guns as I can afford. But until an actual crime has taken place there is nothing that can be done. Now if I begin to threaten people with death. I begin to wave my guns around in public. Then yes I am commiting a crime and should be arrested.
So how is installing a camera in someone's bedroom without their knowledge any less of a crime than waving your gun around? You shot yourself in the foot with y0ur own argument. Both are ACTS, not thoughts. This guy wasn't just "thinking" about installing a camera while perusing a catalog from the comfort of his own sofa. He was attempting to do it. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:10:26 PM | So as an example. I take my cam and go to my friends house. He gives me permission to enter by giving me a key. While I am there I set my cam up to use on his computer. Am I guilty of a crime? What if I get a glass of milk but did not ask him? Am I guilty of theft?
Now say I am done using my cam but forget to turn it off. My friend comes home and at first does not notice the camera running. Am I now guilty of a crime? You feel I should be arrested?
I get the feeling there is more to the Nephew story than what you typed here. Otherwise your nephew needed a better lawyer. Or he was silly enough to admit his intentions. I have spent years in loss prevention. No crime has been commited until the product leaves the store.
Some of you seem to be under the impression I am defending what this guy did. far from it. I think his intentions were obvious and he is one sick fuk. I would have personally kicked his ass and dealt with the assault charge after. But the fact is no crime had yet taken place.
Now lets stop the witch burning and produce a law that was broken. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:11:00 PM | So should leave the guy, or give him another chance. I think she she sould leave him. What do everyone else think she should do.
Well I know what I would do, kick his creepy ass to the curb, change the locks, file charges, and get a restraining order. Then I would have my home swept for bugs and cameras.
There would be no taking him back ever. To me that would be self abusing and that is something I am not in the habit of doing. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:19:51 PM | Ok lets look at the law in question.
11.13 VOYEURISM
§ 810.14, Fla. Stat.
To prove the crime of Voyeurism, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. (Defendant) secretly [observed] (victim).
2. The (act alleged) was done with a [lewd] [lascivious] [indecent] intent.
3. When (victim) was observed [he] [she] was in a [dwelling] [structure] [conveyance] in which [he] [she] had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
#1 - The camera was being set up. So is fair to say the observation has not yet happened. No law broken here.
#2 - Again no observation was done. The camera was not activated. His intent at this point is not clear. He said it was for security. Do you have anything other than circumstantial evidence to prove his intentions? Did he admit to the act? Is there corroborating evidence to support the circumstantial evidence? No. Again no crime here.
#3 - Again the law states the word observed. Until the camera is turned on no observation had taken place.
The law you listed is only IF observation had taken place. There is zero evidence to support this. If they had found a working camera then yes. Nail his ass to the wall.
And most important... Reread the following part of the law...
To prove the crime of Voyeurism, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
Since the cam was not active and observation had not taken place the Voyeur law does not apply. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:22:16 PM | I never had anyone install a spy cam but I have a story for you.
One day I was vacuming the hall when I noticed some of my son's marbles in the floor. I bent to pick them up and I see a red light under the bed side table. Now this was back when we had answering machines. I know,I'm old.hush. So I think why is the answering machine under the table? I lift it up and it's a voice activated recorder!! I turned on the vacuum and sit that little bugger right by it.
My husband came home and did his normal routine. Push redial to see if I called anyone. He always got time and temperature. Then go sit on the pot 30minutes. He was full of s h i t that's for sure. I wait 5 minutes then I tip toed up to the bathroom door. I hear vroommmmmmm. He was cussing a blue streak. Then I knocked on the door,I think he fell off the pot!! I says very sweetly,"Honey do you want kool-aide or tea with supper"? The rest of the story isn't pretty and I left him soon after that. He was always accusing me of cheating and I never did. He tried his best to break my spirit but he never could. Sometimes I think about him listening to that vacuum and I just get the giggles. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:44:37 PM | | I think sneak is defending this guy so strongly because he empathizes with him so much. No matter how much you talk it's never going to make what this guy did right. I think perhaps you have done something similar in the past which is why you empathises with him.Your creepy sneak , totally creepy. | |
|
Jim978
|
Joined: 7/15/2008
Msg: 44 | |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:51:13 PM |
The law you listed is only IF observation had taken place. There is zero evidence to support this. If they had found a working camera then yes. Nail his ass to the wall.
And most important... Reread the following part of the law...
To prove the crime of Voyeurism, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
Since the cam was not active and observation had not taken place the Voyeur law does not apply.
You should get a refund on your law degree. It doesn't seem to be helping you much here.
There doesn't need to be a seperate statute. Look up the term "inchoate crimes".
"An inchoate offence is the crime of preparing for or seeking to commit another crime. The most common example of an inchoate offence is conspiracy. Inchoate offence has been defined as "Conduct deemed criminal without actual harm being done, provided that the harm that would have occurred is one the law tries to prevent."
Attempting to commit a crime by yourself results in a charge of "Attempting to commit...". Attempting to commit a crime with one or more other people results in a charge of "Conspiracy to commit...". | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:57:58 PM | What is wrong with you? I am not defending his actions. Can you read? What I said is no crime had taken place. Until you can show an actual crime that has taken place the police will do nothing about it. Fact is fact. I dont make the laws. Dont hate on me. Hate on the laws as they apply today.
I am not saying what he did was right. How many times do I need to type it out for you to understand that. I have made it crystal clear in my previous posts.
Get over your blind hate. The Salem Witch Trials ended well over 300 years ago.
I am not discussing wether it is a moral thing to do or not. I admit, and always did, that what he did was disgusting. But that is not the discussion I am having. I am debating wether or not what he did was illegal. So far no one has shown me a law that he broke.
Please stick to the topic. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 5:07:17 PM | Again there is no proof of intention. You would be laughed out of the courtroom if you brought that to trial. All the guy would have to say is he was concerned for his GF well being and intended to tell her about the new security feature when she got home.
You have no evidence of intention. None.
Again. Call the Law Society yourself. It is obvious that you wont believe me. Being caught setting up a camera is not proof of an intended crime. If the camera had been hidden and discovered then you would have a case. If he was in a building that he was not given permission to enter then you might have a case.
The burden is on you to prove his intention. What evidence would you bring to light that proves what he intended to do? Lay it out here for all to see. Right now everyone is assuming guilt. Law states people are innocent until proven guilty. So what proof do you have? | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 5:09:35 PM |
What I said is no crime had taken place. Until you can show an actual crime that has taken place the police will do nothing about it. Fact is fact. I dont make the laws. Dont hate on me. Hate on the laws as they apply today.
Well there is a word that applies in my state INTENT. There would be charges filed and Gawd help him he had better hope the cops get to him very quickly since I am going to be beating him senseless... yanno the five second effect. | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 5:20:56 PM |
Change the locks, block his phone number, and never look back!
Dude, this guy is creepy and controlling. Unless she's into that (which few are), she needs to run fast and far! If he's already doing this without cause, how do you think the REST of any relationship would pan out?
yup, heeeeee's a nutbag | |
|
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 5:24:10 PM | I understand that Sassy. What I am saying is it is very difficult to prove intent. No observation had taken place. That is the key. From the details in the OP I gather he was caught while setting up. There is no proof of intent there. Only proof that he was setting up a camera. We might assume to know what his intentions were. We may even be correct. But law insists on proof and there is no real evidence of intent here.
Criminals often get off on crimes they have commited. Often times laws protect the guilty more than the innocent. It does not make it right. But that is the reality wether we like it or not.
And Sassy. I would gladly hold him down while you kick his ass. I have no tolerance for sh*tbags like that guy. But I do understand and respect the Law. I would hope all of us would. Vigilante justice is not, nor will it ever be, a good thing. | |
|
Jim978
|
Joined: 7/15/2008
Msg: 50 | |
| What would you do if you caught your partner installing spy cams in your apt?
Posted: 11/7/2008 5:30:03 PM |
Again. Call the Law Society yourself. It is obvious that you wont believe me. Being caught setting up a camera is not proof of an intended crime. If the camera had been hidden and discovered then you would have a case. If he was in a building that he was not given permission to enter then you might have a case.
The burden is on you to prove his intention. What evidence would you bring to light that proves what he intended to do? Lay it out here for all to see. Right now everyone is assuming guilt. Law states people are innocent until proven guilty. So what proof do you have?
Call the Law Society yourself. The OP is in Florida. The Law Society doesn't operate in Florida or anywhere else in the U.S. so what they may or may not have to say is pretty much irrelevant.
And while the burden of proof is on the state, it is fairly easy to demonstrate by simply showing that there is no other plausible explaination of the action. Sorry to burst your bubble but showing that there are only 5 possible reasons for doing something and then demonstrating that 4 of them don't apply leaves the jury with one option. And that is a completely acceptable legal practice. A jury only has to be convinced to the "reasonable man" standard. They don't have to be convinced by what unreasonable people might dream up for excuses. | |
|
Home
login 
