Posted on 07/18/2020 6:01:23 AM PDT by buckalfa
It’s a coin toss on secretly or not these days. You can get a fully functional video camera of a quality that broadcast news stations would have lept at just 15 years ago that’s literally a one inch cube and costs less than $100. Easily hidden and some guys hide them about their bedroom to make sex tapes without telling the lady involved.
Did you read the article?
The jerk filmed them secretly.
Woman: Are you recording this?
Man: No, I just want to see what it looks like on my Phone Camera. I didn’t press the Record button. Trust me.
Woman: Okay then...
This isn't even a defamation case, since truth is a defense.
It's a reminder to not be stupid about your partners in various activities. Not limited to sex, also applies to any "hold my beer" situations.
Very much doubt the taping was made “secretly”. Women often agree to such videos for a multitude of reasons.
—
Was wondering the same thing.
Did you read the post I was replying to? The poster asserted that it *had* to be with her consent and implied that she would not have possibly missed a camera pointing at her in the bedroom. I was pointing out that these days the technology makes that a false statement.
Its bot about the video. The allegation is that she was taped without her consent. Most states are two way states that require that the person agrees to recording (Think the phone recordings you hear — this call MAY be recorded for quality and training purposes) means that if you proceed you consent to the recording, and anything that is said on it. There are a few one way states — it does not appear South Carolina is once of them.
She was of age, and consented to having sex with her partner. That is her prerogative. She did NOT consent to having it recorded. IF it is true that he threatened to release the video (fruit from the poisonous tree) to keep here in the relationship — now we are talking coercion / extortion / or possibly rape (If you font have sex with me, I will humiliate you).
I do agree that existing law may be present that would allow prosecution of the party who made the video — however we will definitely be on the losing side if somehow we come to the conclusion that the woman taped against her consent (to at least without it) is in the wrong.
Lets apply a little common sense on this one.
nope — the judgment police like to make their proclamations without having the facts in hand.
So you propose that we do not take someone at their word? No benefit of the doubt? Assume that they are lying? That is pretty harsh...
Right. Never mind not doing it in the first place. Never mind not dating trashy men or women. Never mind using good judgement.
Can anyone think of a legitimate reason for police to video naked people?
Awesome
That one is up there with,"The dog ate my homework and the elephant stepped on my science project."
Sweetheart....next time, don’t lie down...so you don’t have to stand up later. The world is not your private fantasy.
Defund the police!
The odd ball thing is that if one has to ask permission to record a sexual act...what would make one think that the person doing the asking to record is going to abide by a “no” answer? The woman should have gotten a male sex doll...sounds more trustworthy then her male friend. And reusable after proper cleaning. Cheaper than a lawyer (not always)...and won’t reveal any intimacies.
So she didn’t think him holding the cell phone up with the camera facing her during their boom-boom session was anything to worry about at the time? Riggghhhhtttt!
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.