The Water Cooler – Upskirt Pictures Legal

March 6, 2014 · 46 comments

The “Water Cooler” is a feature on Claycord.com where we ask you a question or provide a topic, and you talk about it!

The “Water Cooler” will be up Monday-Friday at noon!

Today’s question is more of a “give us your thoughts” about this unreal story.

Here’s part of the story, from Fox News:

Massachusetts’ highest court ruled Wednesday that a man  who took cellphone photos up the skirts of women riding the Boston subway did not violate state law because the women were not nude or partially nude.

The Supreme Judicial Court overruled a lower court that had upheld charges against Michael Robertson, who was arrested in August 2010 by transit police who set up a sting after getting reports that he was using his cellphone to take photos and video up female riders’ skirts and dresses.

The ruling immediately prompted top Beacon Hill lawmakers to pledge to update state law.

Existing so-called Peeping Tom laws protect people from being photographed in dressing rooms and bathrooms when nude or partially nude, but the way the law is written, it does not protect clothed people in public areas, the court said.

CLICK HERE TO FINISH READING THE STORY.

Talk about it….

1 hapi2 March 6, 2014 at 12:06 PM

its creepy, yes – but not illegal.

anyways, when i go to the store all i see are the shortest shorts imaginable, and yoga pants. not much left to the imagination..

2 Chicken little March 6, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Simple…. Just wear pants

3 I'm Your Huckleberry March 6, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Just another version of a pervert, in my opinion.
Hopefully, one of these days he’ll get a nice photo with bugs crawling out of a woman’s you-know-what.

4 Anon777 March 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Legal or illegal, if I caught someone trying to do that to me they will end up with a broken camera and smashed nuts.

5 anonanonagain March 6, 2014 at 12:10 PM

The way the law is written people can literally “skirt” around the issue of being a pervert with a camera. So a deviant can get away with looking up my skirt and taking pictures without any repercussions as the law is written now. I’m glad that they are taking a second look (sorry for the double entendres) at the way that this law is written and make it more specific when it applies to weirdos and their fetishes…….

6 BDuns March 6, 2014 at 12:11 PM

@#1 What’s realllllly creepy is someone that thinks it’s OK to go one step further and take up-skirt pics simply because they have decided that a girl’s skirt is too short leaving “not much left to the imagination.” Creep.

7 Eddie spaghetti March 6, 2014 at 12:12 PM

This world is goin’ to Hell in a hand basket!!

8 Enfield303 March 6, 2014 at 12:13 PM

Sick bastard, like there is not enough of this crap on the internet to get his jollies. If it’s not illegal, change the law.

9 anonanonagain March 6, 2014 at 12:14 PM

@ hapi2, I agree with you. Too many under-dressed people out there these days. It’s a constant barrage of looking at the PeopleofWalmart.com. site……..

10 Or March 6, 2014 at 12:18 PM

Wear nice clean draws!

11 What security March 6, 2014 at 12:21 PM

I’m tired of seeing peoples buttt cracks pass that law.

12 Crankcord Doug March 6, 2014 at 12:22 PM

I feel the existing laws are sufficient. What I don’t understand is there are already so many people willing to show themselves on the internet, why do these people try so hard to see the ones who value their privacy?

13 @OR March 6, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Or none at all.

14 Must be Thursday March 6, 2014 at 12:24 PM

I agree, it’s time to change the law. As a society, it’s time we crack down on these sick perverts.

15 He better not do that in SF. March 6, 2014 at 12:30 PM

He might find a little more under those skirts than he was looking for. It’s like Scotland out there.

16 Scotsman March 6, 2014 at 12:33 PM

Aye laddy I’ll tell you what. Some pre vert tries lookin up me kilt and he’ll get a cosh on his brain bucket!

17 jtkatec March 6, 2014 at 12:35 PM

There’s laws for everything now. I just say we go back to tar and feathering.

18 just a concordian March 6, 2014 at 12:36 PM

Such hot topics this week!

First off… if you need to “imagine” what’s under a skirt, then you’re either a 10 year old or have lived in a cave since birth. There is nothing there we haven’t seen before, in person, in a picture or on a screen.

Second… this takes me back a few years… company retreat at a hotel, lots of free drinks, afterparty at a coworkers room. Some guy, an intern, decided it would be great fun to take a picture underneath the hot secretary’s skirt. Granted, she is absolutely gorgeous. But that’s not an invitation to paparazzi away at your leisure. I saw the motion of the hand sliding while holding a camera and reacted. Needless to say, the internship was cut short.

It seems now in Mass upskirts are legal yet oral sex remains illegal. Way to go Massholes! Glad I am no longer there.

P.S. is a kilt the same as a skirt?

19 Ted K., SuperMax March 6, 2014 at 12:40 PM

The existing law is clearly outdated and did not anticpate whacky and sick antics by these degenerate perverts.

They’ll change it in due time.

20 Anonymous March 6, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Look for legislation from DeSaulnier. Anything to get publicity..

21 94598 March 6, 2014 at 12:52 PM

What good is a new law if there is no punishment?

22 Walter White March 6, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Good Lord. First no smoking in public places and now this? Is this America or Nazi Germany? When will the madness end??

23 GT March 6, 2014 at 12:55 PM

The problem is with the lawmakers. While Mass. has a Peeping Tom law, it doesn’t specifically outlaw upskirt photos. And so when other states like New York and Washington passed laws or closed loopholes in existing laws that made upskirt photos and videos illegal, the lawmakers in Mass. (and other states, most likely) did nothing. Instead of waiting for an incident to happen in their own state, they should’ve been proactive and followed suit by closing the loophole in their Peeping Tom law. Other states should look at this incident and be proactive about it and make upskirt shots illegal if they haven’t done so already.

24 Michelle March 6, 2014 at 1:13 PM

A violation of the right to privacy in a public place. What’s under my skirt is none of your business unless I choose to make it your business. The Peeping Tom law needs to be rewritten ASAP!

25 The Mamba March 6, 2014 at 1:24 PM

That makes no sense, that perv sure got lucky this time.

26 Victim Blamer March 6, 2014 at 1:49 PM

Women should know better than to wear skirts without shorts under them. It’s just common sense. And if you’re going to invite upskirt photographers by barely covering your naughty bits, at least get a club.

27 tired of taxes March 6, 2014 at 1:53 PM

Step 1 in grand master plan complete.

Now for the rest of the steps:
Step 2 is to pass a law banning the sale of panties.
Step 3 is to make wearing panties illegal.
Step 4 would outlaw the sale of shaving razors and shaving cream.

‘muff said.

28 Anon2you March 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM

And in a related story…Sales of the ShoeCam skyrocket in Massachusetts…

29 Incognito March 6, 2014 at 2:08 PM

@Victim Blamer #26
It’s no one’s business whether a woman is wearing underwear or not. Whether we chose to cover our naughty bits is our own business, that doesn’t mean it’s an invitation for photographs.

30 My advice... March 6, 2014 at 2:08 PM

If you see this guy filming you, just “snatch” his phone away…

31 Too Bad March 6, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Too bad for the ladies who were filmed…their pics/videos are all over youtube now…

32 Domestic CEO March 6, 2014 at 2:15 PM

If that was me… there would have been one less cell phone in this world. His hand may have hurt a bit too after I kicked that phone across the subway.

33 Suzanne March 6, 2014 at 2:18 PM

Blamer, Michelle is right. What is under my skirt is my business. What a woman chooses to wear is under her skirt is also private. Most wear panties-some wear nothing. It seems that the continual peeping tom may have gotten luck one day. He violated the Peeping Tom law-and it should be addendumed.

34 The Grant March 6, 2014 at 2:43 PM

@tired of taxes

‘muff said

hahaha

35 Cowellian March 6, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Victim Blamer@26,
Sarcasm is lost on way too many people around here. And you already know that I like the club solution.

36 Let us be honest here... March 6, 2014 at 3:17 PM

ALOT (not all) of girls who wear these kind of outfits (short skirts, no panties, etc.) are doing with the sole intention of having some guy play “peeping tom”…they like the attention. Sure, there are many who just want to feel comfortable during the hot summer days (since this guy was arrested around August 2010 in Boston, I imagine it was fairly warm). But i have seen quite a few girls who will wear nothing under there, and intentionally bend over – what are you expected the unmarried and young male population on this earth to do????

In any case, can someone please at least teach these girls to cross their legs if they choose to wear revealing outfits, at least in public? That way, peeping tom may not be able to see anything of value.

37 RANDOM TASK March 6, 2014 at 3:18 PM

see now this is why garbage happens….the judges instead of using common sense and obviously locking this guy up used an out so as to not infect his career as does all public servants ….cover their butts and let us rot …….lemmings voted us right into it and obviously did not see it coming …..when you listen to the lies you elect deviants who put in place lazy representatives who only look to protect themselves and not do their jobs to the full extent.

38 just a concordian March 6, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Massachusetts might see a huge increase in unshaven out of shape single male tourists.

39 @38 March 6, 2014 at 3:48 PM

And it would be pretty funny if they all wore short skirts.

40 Skirting the Issue March 6, 2014 at 4:04 PM

I’m a woman and I occasionally wear skirts/dresses of various lengths. I just throw on some “boyshort”-style undies or shapewear (something like Spanx) and couldn’t care less if someone took a photo! Well, actually, I *would* care if a guy was somehow making money off a picture of my fully-covered crotch/rear – *I* should be the one getting paid, dammit!

41 J March 6, 2014 at 4:57 PM

It been only one day since the ruling and already the Mass. Legislature has approved new legislation to deal with this.

42 Quagmire March 6, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Giggity,giggity, alrighhhht.

43 Larry March 6, 2014 at 6:54 PM

Sick Bastard.This Country has turned into total crap.

44 Reality Slap March 6, 2014 at 7:49 PM

Wondering if Massachusettes highest court would have felt the same way if it was their wives or daughters that were the victims?

45 RunDogRun March 6, 2014 at 7:56 PM

This is happening world wide. The sad part
is that it can be done without the victim even
knowing the photos have been taken. Shocking
that some people have so little respect for
women, regardlesd of their age . .. or the length
of the skirt. It’s really nobody’s business
what’s under a womans skirt. Nobody but a
pervert would even care and someone who
does this, or activates a webcam remotely
to spy on another individual, need to be
recognized as such and treated accordingly.
It is predatory behavior.

46 Atticus Thraxx March 6, 2014 at 9:27 PM

I’m a big fan of a short skirt and strong wind but that’s just unacceptable and creepy. Glad Mass. leg. tightened that up.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: