Wis. court: Nude people still have privacy rights - GoFuckYourself.com

tony286 · 12-31-2008, 05:22 PM

Wis. court: Nude people still have privacy rights

By SCOTT BAUER, Associated Press Writer Scott Bauer, Associated Press Writer ? Tue Dec 30, 4:39 pm ET

MADISON, Wis. ? A state appeals court ruled Tuesday that a person who is voluntarily nude in the presence of another still has privacy rights against being secretly videotaped, in a decision that bolsters Wisconsin's video voyeur law.

The ruling upholds the felony guilty plea of Mark Jahnke, who videotaped his girlfriend while she was naked and while they were having sex. He argued in his appeal that because the woman agreed to be naked around him, she had no reasonable expectation of privacy.

The state Department of Justice argued that shared intimacy does not give a person the right to film another unknowingly.

Jahnke's attorney, Michael Herbert of Madison, argued that the court had found in a previous case that a reasonable expectation of privacy existed when a nude person reasonably believed he or she was "secluded from the presence of others."

Prosecutors argued the video voyeur law would make no sense under that interpretation. The appeals court agreed, saying the definition in the previous case was not intended to cover all circumstances.

Judge Charles Dykman, the dissenter in the 2-1 decision, said the 2001 law does not specifically prohibit what Jahnke did.

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen praised the ruling.

"Wisconsin's citizens enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy not to be secretly videotaped while in the nude, and Wisconsin's criminal law has been correctly interpreted to protect that expectation," he said.

Herbert said he did not know whether the case would be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

In April 2007, Jahnke pleaded guilty to illegally making a nude recording. He was sentenced to three years' probation and six months in jail, which was put on hold pending his appeal.

He was a Waunakee High School chemistry teacher but negotiated a resignation after school officials voted to fire him.

Jahnke's ex-girlfriend said she became suspicious when she saw a flash of a red light from beneath a pile of clothes in her bedroom. She complained to Stevens Point police, who searched Jahnke's house and seized 33 audio tapes of the couple having sex and three DVDs. One showed the couple having sex, and two showed the woman nude in her home.

After Shock Media · 12-31-2008, 05:24 PM

Screw them, I just keep a notice posted on my front door about cameras. People never even comment on it.

tony286 · 12-31-2008, 05:26 PM

Also he is going to secretly video tape them fucking, the dummy doesnt put a piece of tape over the red light duh lol

seeandsee · 12-31-2008, 05:33 PM

laws laws laws

sortie · 12-31-2008, 05:58 PM

Seems like common sense to me.

All the law is really saying is that if you video tape it then it better never get out.

And why should it?

Just because a chick wants to sleep with you does not means she wants to
be in a porn video.

Donfoolio · 12-31-2008, 06:03 PM

what applies to seeing someone naked and then just starting to wank yourself off ? Is there a law against that? Cause I would have to call hypocrisy on that.

tony286 · 12-31-2008, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sortie

Seems like common sense to me.

All the law is really saying is that if you video tape it then it better never get out.

And why should it?

Just because a chick wants to sleep with you does not means she wants to
be in a porn video.

That's not what it says.

sortie · 12-31-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

That's not what it says.

Correct, it doesn't actually say that.

12-31-2008, 05:22 PM	#1
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	Wis. court: Nude people still have privacy rights Wis. court: Nude people still have privacy rights By SCOTT BAUER, Associated Press Writer Scott Bauer, Associated Press Writer ? Tue Dec 30, 4:39 pm ET MADISON, Wis. ? A state appeals court ruled Tuesday that a person who is voluntarily nude in the presence of another still has privacy rights against being secretly videotaped, in a decision that bolsters Wisconsin's video voyeur law. The ruling upholds the felony guilty plea of Mark Jahnke, who videotaped his girlfriend while she was naked and while they were having sex. He argued in his appeal that because the woman agreed to be naked around him, she had no reasonable expectation of privacy. The state Department of Justice argued that shared intimacy does not give a person the right to film another unknowingly. Jahnke's attorney, Michael Herbert of Madison, argued that the court had found in a previous case that a reasonable expectation of privacy existed when a nude person reasonably believed he or she was "secluded from the presence of others." Prosecutors argued the video voyeur law would make no sense under that interpretation. The appeals court agreed, saying the definition in the previous case was not intended to cover all circumstances. Judge Charles Dykman, the dissenter in the 2-1 decision, said the 2001 law does not specifically prohibit what Jahnke did. Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen praised the ruling. "Wisconsin's citizens enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy not to be secretly videotaped while in the nude, and Wisconsin's criminal law has been correctly interpreted to protect that expectation," he said. Herbert said he did not know whether the case would be appealed to the state Supreme Court. In April 2007, Jahnke pleaded guilty to illegally making a nude recording. He was sentenced to three years' probation and six months in jail, which was put on hold pending his appeal. He was a Waunakee High School chemistry teacher but negotiated a resignation after school officials voted to fire him. Jahnke's ex-girlfriend said she became suspicious when she saw a flash of a red light from beneath a pile of clothes in her bedroom. She complained to Stevens Point police, who searched Jahnke's house and seized 33 audio tapes of the couple having sex and three DVDs. One showed the couple having sex, and two showed the woman nude in her home.

12-31-2008, 05:24 PM	#2
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	Screw them, I just keep a notice posted on my front door about cameras. People never even comment on it. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

12-31-2008, 05:33 PM	#4
seeandsee Check SIG! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Europe (Skype: gojkoas) Posts: 50,945	laws laws laws __________________ BUY MY SIG - 50$/Year Contact here

12-31-2008, 05:58 PM	#5
sortie Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,771	Seems like common sense to me. All the law is really saying is that if you video tape it then it better never get out. And why should it? Just because a chick wants to sleep with you does not means she wants to be in a porn video. __________________

12-31-2008, 06:03 PM	#6
Donfoolio Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mars Posts: 963	what applies to seeing someone naked and then just starting to wank yourself off ? Is there a law against that? Cause I would have to call hypocrisy on that. __________________ Promote SipSap escort search ICQ: 227853047

12-31-2008, 05:26 PM	#3
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	Also he is going to secretly video tape them fucking, the dummy doesnt put a piece of tape over the red light duh lol