Posted on 07/18/2020 6:01:23 AM PDT by buckalfa
BELTON, S.C. (WSPA)- Belton mayor Tiffany Ownbey is pressing for a revenge porn law in South Carolina after she says she was a victim.
Years ago, Tiffany Ownbey was in a relationship with a man who used his cell phone to secretly record a private intimate encounter with her without her consent, according to Ownbey’s attorney Druanne White. White said the man later revealed to Ownbey that he had the recording and threatened to distribute it if she broke up with him. Ownbey told him she would press charges.
“I felt violated. I felt hurt, anger,” Ownby said. “There’s no words to describe how I felt at that point.”
She said she never saw the recording.
“Kind of forgot about it,” Ownbey said. “Didn’t think anything.”
Ownbey then went years without contact with that man, according to her attorney. After she became Belton’s first elected female mayor in November, her lawyer said Ownbey began hearing rumors that the recording may be released. The recording has since been released.
Several weeks ago, Ownbey asked the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division to investigate. She said it wasn’t a difficult decision to make.
“Because I have a daughter,” she said. “If this happened to me, it could happen to anyone.”
SLED is now investigating. The public reaction to the investigation isn’t what the mayor expected.
“I knew I was going to have some adverse publicity, but I never expected in a million years to be victim shamed the way I was,” she said.
She said that felt like being violated all over again.
“I guess I was kind of appalled. Like really? We’re in 2020 and someone comes forward from being a victim and that’s how you treat them? That’s what’s wrong with what’s going on today,” she said.
According to the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, South Carolina is one of four states that dosen’t have a law criminalizing the publication of non-consensual pornography, also known as “revenge porn.”
White said right now in South Carolina, it’s difficult to prosecute someone who records and releases intimate acts without consent.
“A prosecutor must prove every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” White said. “So as a prosecutor you’re trying to kind of squeeze some behavior over here into this law, but it dosen’t quite fit, you’re going to have a really hard time.”
Ownbey wants to change that. She’s pushing for South Carolina to make revenge porn a crime.
“Revenge porn is real and it’s happening daily,”she said. “It’s happening to a lot women. And it’s time something happens about it. If somebody’s going to stand up, why not me?”
White said a law should require people to get written permission to record a sexual act and then distribute it or face a felony.
Several bills that would criminalize revenge porn have been introduced in South Carolina’s General Assembly, but none of them have ever been passed into law.
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.