It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Massachusetts, which currently has the toughest wiretapping law in the country, forbidding you from secretly recording cops even if they have no expectation of privacy, is now one of the only states that allows you to secretly record up a woman’s skirt. It’s a contradictory position to say the least, but the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that it is only abiding by the written law, which states the following: "Whoever willfully photographs, videotapes or electronically surveils another person who is nude or partially nude, with the intent to secretly conduct or hide such activity, when the other person in such place and circumstance would have a reasonable expectation of privacy in not being so photographed, videotaped or electronically surveilled, and without that person’s knowledge and consent, shall be punished by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment."
The state’s highest court says “upskirting,” the practice of secretly photographing under a woman’s skirt, is not prohibited by state law. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said today that a state law intended to prohibit “Peeping Tom” voyeurism of completely or partially undressed people did not apply to people who take pictures of people who are fully clothed. The ruling came in the case of a man who allegedly took photos under the dresses of women on Green Line trolleys. The court focused on the language of the law, which prohibits secret photography of “a person … who is partially nude.” “A female passenger on a MBTA trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering [private] parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing,” the court said in a unanimous ruling written by Justice Margot Botsford. The court said Suffolk County prosecutors, who argued that the Peeping Tom law should apply, had a “flawed” interpretation of the law.
This is why you can't legislate morality. So much for human decency.
Awesome! I'm moving to Boston and buying a new camera. lol.
(I'M JOKING!!!!! PLEASE DO NOT ATTACK! IT WAS A JOKE!)
The article says that they are fixing that law to make it illegal, many apparently not having been aware that its "legal". That's a much different story than what the sensationalist title suggests.