The Sexist

Mall Voyeur Arrested on July 4th

D.C. police may not have stuck anyone with illegal fireworks charges this July 4th, but police did manage to nab one man taking advantage of the day's patriotic displays: On Sunday afternoon, D.C. police detained 49-year-old Maryland resident Charles Defoe for engaging in voyeuristic activities on the grounds of the Washington Monument. According to an affidavit, "Defoe was surreptitiously videotaping the underskirts of numerous females" in the holiday crowd gathered on the Mall throughout the day. A parent of one of the victims reported Defoe, and a review of the tape in his video camera confirmed the activity. The affidavit reads that Defoe "admitted to intentionally video capturing images of private or undergarments-clad genital areas of numerous females on the National Mall, without their expressed and informed consent."

Photo by Mike Hicks.

  • Emily WK

    Didn't a court recently rule that it wasn't illegal to videotape or photograph up women's skirts? Dangit, I can't remember that, but holy mother of god does that make ZERO sense.

    If I wanted the world to see my underpants, I wouldn't wear a skirt. There you go.

  • http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist Amanda Hess

    Emily, I seem to remember that, too. Can't remember which jurisdiction. Anyone?

  • Kim Ha

    What kind of court is that?!

    I thought the rule was, you can't if they're just walking around. But if they're like, walking up some stairs or they're above on a ramp, and the video person below can see them, then it's fair game or whatever.

  • Em

    I think it might have been just a state law? In which case it may not apply.

  • Emily WK

    Apparently it isn't illegal in Seattle. Here is the link I found:

    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/87863_voyeur20.shtml

    It seems that the relevant bit here, at least in Washington state, is where the person is located (in public), not what part of their body is being filmed. That strikes me as utterly nonsensical.

  • Pingback: What Constitutes “Voyeurism” In D.C.? - The Sexist - Washington City Paper

  • paranoidlawyer

    I think everyone is thinking of Oklahoma?

    http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/80122/

...