Video: Man arrested for "voyeurism for a sexual purpose"

General Discussion
1

Okay, so I just started watching the video but it immediately jumped out at me as something that may be to some here (depending on the laws of any given location).

This guy hires a dating coach, and part of that apparently entailed having the coach following him around with a camera in public while the client (the guy who hired the dating coach) practices approaching women for friendly and casual conversation.

Well,I just paused it where the guy starts telling the story of his arrest. It was his last approach of the day, he spoke to an attractive woman in a pink dress and it was going well when police showed up and arrested him for “voyeurism for a sexual purpose”, and this jumped out at me because, I wasn’t aware that this was even a category.

We are all aware that filming in public is not inherently a crime, but is it possible that some localities may construe such filming as “voyeurism for a sexual purpose?” At that rate, any caps of a scantly-clad woman, one in tight clothes like leggings, short skirt, or otherwise hot attire could theoretically fit under that description.

So my first thought from there is “what separates filming in public” from “voyeurism for a sexual purpose”. If a hot woman walks by a news camera, can the reporter be charged for “voyeurism for a sexual purpose” or just the camera man? Speaking of which, I better continue watching the video to see if the dating coach or his workers got arrested as well. I don’t think anyone should be getting arrested, but if the dating coach client is getting arrested, I don’t see why the coach/their camera guy wouldn’t also be arrested and charged.

Don’t form your own conclusions without watching the video or reading the transcript (you can always copy the text of the transcript to your favorite Ai tool and ask it to summarize it if you don’t want to watch the vid).

As it turns out, the coach had the camera hidden in a lunch box but there are more details that I think are worth evaluating before drawing conclusions. So far the only conclusion I have is that a grave injustice was done.

5

“Voyeurism is the sexual interest in or practice of watching other people engaged in intimate behaviors, such as undressing, sexual activity, or other actions of a private nature” - Wikipedia.

The cop was spewing horseshit from his dumb mouth hoping the person under suspicion would “admit” to some crime so that the officer could say he incriminated himself. If this isn’t 100% accurate its close. I had this explained to me by my lawyer after I was caught capping and got arrested for it, except it wasn’t for the caps.

Lawyer told me if I hadn’t opened my mouth at all to the department, that they couldn’t have pressed ANY charges against me, regardless if I was recording or not (as long as it’s in an area that doesn’t expect reasonable privacy, like a bathroom).

Stay safe guys, don’t believe cops they’re liars and if they go out of the way to cause you trouble its out of self-righteous belief that what we are doing is disgusting… like some how the way women be dressing in these posts ain’t?? Beats me.

13 Likes
7

I’m here to tell you: don’t think, know.

Read up on the laws of your country, state, or municipality, and ensure you obey by them in any conduct, online or otherwise. Doesn’t matter what the textbook definition of something is - every country has its own law as it pertains to candids and voyeurism, and you should be aware of them.

1 Like