A guy who secretly video taped women undressing in his tanning salon thinks his case should be dismissed because "the law under which he is charged is unconstitutional." He says the law is too "vague."
It always amazes me that so many people who break the law end up using the law to defend themselves. I feel certain the constitution does not explicitly prohibit the use of video cameras in dressing rooms, but we all should have "a reasonable expectation of privacy" when taking off our clothes.
"The law suggests an invasion of privacy occurs when images are recorded for sexual gratification or desire," says Melissa DeLoach in the Springfield News-Leader. "The law allows secret video taping if it is done for a legitimate purpose, but it gives no distinction as to what is legitimate."
Brother! While the attorneys try to sort it out, why not put this guy in a room with the husbands and boyfriends and fathers of the women he taped, give them all baseball bats and just see what is legitimate. The constitution is pretty vague about doing that, too.
