Upskirt cam found in NY grate-owner faces felony charges

[Squirt]

May 18, 2005

Police found a so-called "skirt cam" under a subway grate at 88th Street and Lexington Avenue Tuesday afternoon after a woman called police saying she had noticed suspicious wires protruding from the grate as she passed by.

Police closed off the street, fearing the device was a bomb, but soon realized that it was a four-inch multi-media video camera that was pointing upward and recording passers-by.

The camera was attached to an external hard-drive, making it possible for the video to be saved and then uploaded onto the Internet.

Investigators do not consider the camera to be a threat to public safety, but they do consider it a threat to individual privacy.

Some passersby in the neighborhood who spoke to NY1 said they would think twice before ever walking over a grate again.

"It's pretty awful. It really is. I think that I walk over that every single day, but she actually wears skirts more than I do," said one woman, referring to another woman with her. "I happen to have one on today. I'm so glad that I was wearing pants [the rest of the time.]"

"It's really weird that people would actually do this," said a young girl. "I think it's disgusting."

"I generally don't walk on grates," said another woman, who added that she definitely won't be walking over grates from now on.

Police sources say investigators are looking into the possibility the camera was installed by MTA workers.

The California company that manufactures the camera says it will work with police to trace the serial number back to its owner.

A few years ago, Governor George Pataki signed a law making "video voyeurism" a felony offense in New York State, meaning the person responsible for installing the camera could face up to seven years in prison if convicted. FULL STORY

What do you guys think about this? A felony in NY to film upskirts without the persons knowledge. I agree with it. If I had a daughter I wouldn't want someone filming up her skirt, without her knowledge, and making a quick buck on the internet.. what do you think?

[Bec]

While creative- I certainly agree it's a violation of privacy if done without consent forms. A better approach would of been to setup the scene and then hire women to walk over it or loiter a bit ... still would of given the impression of voyeur without the jail time.

[basschick]

tell ya what - i don't care to be free content. i consider that my body is owned by me, and other people don't have a right to do whatever they wish about it. and i believe others should have the same right!

[basement]

I have never understood how people get away with this. I remember a few years back a guy here in Canada received a lot of embarassing publicity and a jail term for having a camera in the toe of his shoe that he would slip under unsuspecting women.

[longboardjim]

most unfortunate! , but then we live in a "watch" society! , i always assume the minute i leave my home there is some camera catching me at some point in my day either the "atm-cam" , the cam at the intersection making sure i didn't "run the red light!" , the security camera's in the mall! , and being in hawaii i'm sure i am in someone's "vacation film!" , i don't wonder anymore what it would be like to be a "star" i'm already in the "role of my life!"

jim

[Squirt]

I think that if you're in the public domain you have a certain expectation of loss of privacy... but NOTHING like people looking up your skirt and puting it on the internet!!

I'm glad laws are finally catching up with the times... even if at a snails pace.

Anyone else hear of a similar story way back when... at a busy national park public outhouse toilet? There was a guy in full rubber outfit... with goggles on... under the toilet in the outhouse.... getting off when people pissed & shitt on him below :wacko:

[curiousbunny]

yea that's bad, the bottom line is it sells LOL.
i bet if the news would say, this person had a hidden cam in the LA fitness locker room and was broadcasting on his site fitnesscam.com we would all jump online 2 see it

[longboardjim]

I think that if you're in the public domain you have a certain expectation of loss of privacy... but NOTHING like people looking up your skirt and puting it on the internet!!

I'm glad laws are finally catching up with the times... even if at a snails pace.

Anyone else hear of a similar story way back when... at a busy national park public outhouse toilet? There was a guy in full rubber outfit... with goggles on... under the toilet in the outhouse.... getting off when people pissed & shitt on him below :wacko:

there's the things i expect! , and then there's the things i don't! , although something as "blatant" as shoving a cam underneath some hottie roomates boxer shorts while he's talking to you in the morning! is absolutely disgusting! ( i can't even imagine it! ) television tells us it's okay to watch 7 strangers thrown together into one house or a deserted island so we can watch every move they make and hope for some glimpse of "flesh!" every now and then ( not that i watch t.v! )
i'm glad they are "cracking-down!" on "blatant!" , but to eliminate "voyeurism" all together! , i might miss my "camboys!..err..survivor!" :goof:

jim

[Squirt]

yea that's bad, the bottom line is it sells LOL.
i bet if the news would say, this person had a hidden cam in the LA fitness locker room and was broadcasting on his site fitnesscam.com we would all jump online 2 see it

Yeah, and like the nude skateboarder story.... the OMG what is this world coming to... then cut to the clip of him skateboarding nude So contradictory!

But bottom line, just because something sells doesn't make it right, or ok. And just because something is legal doesn't make it right, or ok. And just because some is illegal, doesn't make it wrong, or not ok. And one time.... at band camp....

[curiousbunny]

But bottom line, just because something sells doesn't make it right,

true am just a curiousbunny ill still watch it