A UK court of appeals has ruled that filming a sexual partner during intercourse without consent falls under voyeurism, a criminal offense.
The ruling by a three-judge panel strikes down an appeal by a man who had filmed himself having sex with prostitutes without their knowledge.
His defense argued that he had not committed voyeurism due to the fact that even a bedroom is not a private place so long as he had permission to be there.
More specifically, the two women charged didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy after allowing their client, Tony Richards into their rooms.
“The test is whether the complainant had a reasonable expectation of privacy. It may be a betrayal of trust to record a person having sex with you but it’s not an illegal act,” Richard’s attorney said.
Thailand recently altered its criminal laws to increase criminal punishments for any sex crimes that are filmed.
The state prosecution in the UK has historically resisted bringing charges in cases such as these.
Emily Hunt, who testified in the case but wasn’t involved in the events, said that prosecutors refused to bring charges in a case where she was filmed naked in a hotel bedroom without her consent.
She argued, and the judges concurred, that consent should be the determining factor in cases brought regarding the 2003 Sexual Offences Act.
In tossing out the appeal, Lord Justice Fulford said “A defendant can be guilty of an offense of voyeurism in relation [to having sex] even when he is a participant”, since the act protects individuals against being recorded in a private act.
Read the full story here.
{ 0 comments… add one now }