Abner!
Posted on 01/29/2005 12:25:16 PM PST by mastercylinder
VANCOUVER (CP) - The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that masturbating at home is not an offence, even if the activity can be seen by peeking neighbours.
The case centred on whether a private space - Daryl Clark's living room - became public because others could view it. The high court said No in a unanimous ruling Thursday. "The living room of his private home was not a place 'to which the public (had) access as of right or by invitation, express or implied,' " Justice Morris Fish wrote, quoting the Criminal Code.
"I do not believe it (access) contemplates the ability of those who are neither entitled nor invited to enter a place to see or hear from the outside, through uncovered windows or open doors, what is transpiring within."
On Oct. 28, 2000, Clark's neighbours across his backyard in Nanaimo, B.C., noticed "some movement" in Clark's living room.
The woman had been watching television with her two young daughters in their family room, a room lit only by a television screen and light from the adjoining kitchen.
The woman moved to another room for a better view, then called her husband. The pair watched Clark for up to 15 minutes from the privacy of their darkened bedroom.
The court found they took care to avoid being seen by Clark, peering out from underneath their partially lowered blinds. Later, the woman's husband fetched a pair of binoculars and a telescope. He also tried, unsuccessfully, to videotape Clark in action, says the judgment.
The judgment notes the pair were "understandably concerned" because they feared Clark was "masturbating to our children."
The neighbours, who are identified only as Mr. and Mrs. S, called police.
The officer was able to see Clark from his belly up from the neighbour's bedroom and from the neck or shoulders up from the street level.
But Clark was charged after the police officer shone his flashlight in Clark's window at close range.
The trial judge concluded he had "converted" his living room into a public place and the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld the conviction.
Clark was given a four-month sentence.
Gil McKinnon, Clark's lawyer, said his client is happy with the outcome and glad to be getting on with his life, but he's not interested in talking about his court fight.
McKinnon said the Supreme Court rejected the notion that people's private living spaces can be turned into public places just because someone can see inside.
"A person has the freedom in his or her own living room to do whatever they choose to do and is not caught by the criminal law if they have no intent to offend or insult someone who may not be on that private property."
The protection isn't extended to someone who commits an indecent act on their own property with the intention of letting the neighbours see it.
But in this case, the evidence suggested Clark had no idea he was being watched, the court found.
John Russell, president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, said he was surprised the case got before the courts in the first place.
But he said he was relieved the ruling went the way it did.
If it had gone the other way, "we would have to be a lot more careful about closing the drapes or covering up.
"In fact, most Canadians are careful in those ways and it would appear that the poor man had just failed to take the formal precautions."
I'll say. Few people realize what a massive influx of illegal Canadian immigrants we would have been subjected to had this ruling gone the other way.
MODERATER......PLEASE PULL THIS!
Any way you rub it he had it coming.
Pull it some more ! bada bing!
Well, at least he got off.
Do you think judge brought some others in to mass debate the topic before coming to a conclusion?
Again and again and again ~ until he almost went blind.
The man was doing it in front of the window with his light on. He knew enough to turn the light off when the police arrived.
On the other hand, if you do it when no one's watching it's a felony.
Those crazy Canadians! No wonder so many of them are in our entertainment industry.
Did his hand go to sleep after he was done?
Let him with the free hand throw the first stone....
Sounds like good news. Let me just get my glasses.
Ah, yes, Canada's Supreme Court once again is hearing cases of vital national security. I heard a while back that another case of super-importance was heard about whether calling Indians 'Tonto' was a racial slur.
(sarcasm off)
Is there any wonder why Canada is not a great country?
Sometimes things just have to jerked off.
"Did his hand go to sleep after he was done?"
No, but it's trying to light a Marlboro by itself.
This story is presented totally from the exhibitionist guy's side. In another report I read that he was in front of the window with the light on, and he turned the light off when the police arrived. Who stands in front of a window with the light on to do that sort of thing? Only someone who means to be seen, imo. Obviously others agreed with me, just not the judge.
Abner!
He became chicken during the choke.
My heavens!
It depends on which version you read. This story sounds like they only spoke with the lawyers defending the guy STANDING IN FRONT OF THE WINDOW WITH THE LIGHT ON.
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.