Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Upscale clothier arrested for videotaping customers
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 12/19/03 | Sam Wood

Posted on 12/19/2003 9:45:53 PM PST by Holly_P

The owner of a Camden County boutique has been arrested for taping customers as they undressed in the store's changing room, authorities said today.

Eli Arochas, 49, the proprietor of the Next Contemporary shop at the Ritz Plaza in Voorhees, allegedly set up a hidden videocamera that also recorded audio. The camera was positioned at a hole in the wall in one of three dressing rooms at the upscale women's clothier, said Camden County Prosecutor Vincent P. Sarubbi.

Voorhees police began an investigation after a shop patron said that she had heard a clicking noise, which she suspected might have been a camera shutter, while she was in the changing room, Sarubbi said.

Following an investigation, police confiscated several videotapes of more than 60 women in various states of undress, Sarubbi said.

"The tapes were not intended to be used for security purposes," Sarubbi said, "but were soley for the owner's prurient interests."

Arochas, who was arrested Thursday, is charged with one count of harassment, a disorderly persons Offense, and one count of violating the state's wiretapping law, which is a third-degree offense carrying a maximum prison term of five years upon conviction.

Although "technically, it is not illegal to videotape some one in a dressing room in New Jersey," Sarrubi said, it is a crime to tape a private conversation without the consent of the participants. He noted that a bill was working its way through the state Senate that could close the loophole.

Fourteen unidentified women in the tapes are heard having conversations with another person standing outside the changing rooms, Sarubbi said, allowing charges of wiretapping to be filed against Arochas.

Investigators believe Arochas operated the videocamera alone, behind a dressing room wall and focusing on the women through three discreet holes.

There is no indication that Arochas distributed images of the women over the Internet or in print, Sarubbi said. An investigation is continuing. Anyone who used a changing room at the store in the last year is asked to call Voorhees police Lt. Frank Bialecki at 856-627-5858, ext. 114.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact staff writer Sam Wood at 856-779-3838 or at samwood@phillynews.com.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 12/19/2003 9:45:53 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
If only he didn't add the sound recording equipment.
2 posted on 12/19/2003 9:49:08 PM PST by rmmcdaniell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
"technically, it is not illegal to videotape some one in a dressing room in New Jersey,"

Well that just stinks.

3 posted on 12/19/2003 9:56:52 PM PST by Hillary's Lovely Legs (Dean, a constant critic of the war now left looking like a monkey whose organ grinder had run away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
The owner of a Camden County boutique has been arrested for taping customers as they undressed in the store's changing room, authorities said today.

How about walking around the mall with a couple of those mini-cams strapped to your shoes?

That's not illegal, is it? ;)

4 posted on 12/19/2003 10:10:32 PM PST by WackyKat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillary's Lovely Legs
"technically, it is not illegal to videotape some one in a dressing room in New Jersey,"

But as of Thursday, "distracted driving" is now illegal. Unreal.

And a gay union law passed the legislature by one vote.

McGreedy said he will sign it.
5 posted on 12/19/2003 10:13:06 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WackyKat
How about walking around the mall with a couple of those mini-cams strapped to your shoes?

That's not illegal, is it? ;)

Not sure if it's legal, but is definitely hazardous to your health!

Jack
6 posted on 12/19/2003 10:13:55 PM PST by btcusn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
Hmmm...

Something tells me that "Fourteen unidentified women" and their lawyers will soon own an upscale clothing boutique.

7 posted on 12/19/2003 10:16:10 PM PST by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hillary's Lovely Legs
A lot of states were behind the times on the videotaping thing, with laws against eavesdropping but not against pictures & video with no sound.

A few years ago it was discovered a Salem area landlord (also a government employee, incidentally), had placed peepholes & video cameras in the attic space of several of his rental units. He was arrested but subsequently released when it was discovered that state laws did not prohibit video peeping, only sound recordings, and his recordings had no sound.

That loophole had been closed, but the new prohibition was still narowly defined and did not preclude things like upskirt shots in public places. It is becoming common for people to use cel phones with cameras for stuff like that, and I think our state legislature outlawed that practice just last year.
8 posted on 12/19/2003 11:32:31 PM PST by Clinging Bitterly (President Bush sends his regards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
I guess it's now illegal to try and stop shoplifting.

If you want the right to privacy, then don't try on the clothes. Besides, what moron doesn't know their size?

Come on.
9 posted on 12/19/2003 11:43:46 PM PST by Fledermaus (Fascists, Totalitarians, Baathists, Communists, Socialists, Democrats - what's the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
BUMP
10 posted on 12/20/2003 2:44:00 AM PST by Dr. Scarpetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
I've noticed that in more expensive brands, I wear a size smaller than normal. It's a marketing ploy. Many ladies would pay the extra money just for the satisfaction of fitting into a size 6 rather than a 8.
11 posted on 12/20/2003 2:57:03 AM PST by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Quilla
Look in the mirror and you will look bigger no matter what the brand.
12 posted on 12/20/2003 3:07:09 AM PST by Atchafalaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
I guess it's now illegal to try and stop shoplifting.

He wasn't trying to stop shoplifting.

And I can tell you've never worked in retail, particularly women's apparel. Shoplifters don't rely on the fitting room at all anymore; they can fit half the store under their clothing while you're looking right at them. And the very best ones are men, who wouldn't be in the fitting rooms anyway.

13 posted on 12/20/2003 3:09:00 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
If you want the right to privacy, then don't try on the clothes.

If they want my money, they'll treat me like a customer and not a criminal.

14 posted on 12/20/2003 3:14:03 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Atchafalaya
Just a stab in the dark, you're not married, are you?

;-)
15 posted on 12/20/2003 3:31:34 AM PST by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson