Is this a ‘Peeping Tom’ crime by college kids?

Q

Our son, and two of his frat buddies, pulled a prank on some sorority girls who were staying at an apartment, which involved “surprising them” at a window into their bathroom while one was showering. To be clear, this was intended to be a prank. Police were called, and all three boys were arrested. What is a Peeping Tom offense, and how do we deal with it? Again, it was a prank!

A

It is a crime in California to spy on, or to take photographs of, someone in a private setting without their knowledge and consent. This is often referred to as a “Peeping Tom” crime. In the classic criminal action, a person (who could be labeled a voyeur) seeks to furtively watch someone in a house, room or other private location, through windows at night, or by binoculars, for sexual gratification purposes.

The offenses are covered by California Penal Code Section 647(i), described as “peeking while loitering,” and/or Penal Code Section 647(j), described as “invasion of privacy.” Bottom line, these are forms of disorderly conduct. Conviction could result in up to six months in jail and a fine up to $1,000 per offense.

There is criteria to be met for the offense to be proven. In a criminal case that means beyond a reasonable doubt, with a unanimous jury. This column cannot address all the machinations that come into play given that you indicate the young men were pranking, so clearly it is prudent to consult a qualified lawyer and carefully go over how to intelligently deal with the matter.

Q

One of the tenants at my building is claiming another tenant, who lives nearby, has been spying on her. She is trying to push this onto me, as I manage the property, and she claims I knew about it and have not taken sufficient actions to prevent it. There are defenses to this right? I had absolutely no clue.

A

Your defenses are indeed unique to you, as the property manager. That said, you have a legal duty of due care, once you have or should have notice of the misconduct. If you can show you had adequate security in place, and/or once you had notice that you put adequate security in place, that could help. After all, you are not the one spying.

In addition, you want to show a clear record of your efforts to maintain safety at the premises, and that once you learned about this illegal conduct, you acted swiftly and diligently. Of course you also want to make clear you did not engage in (or condone) any such behavior.

Possible defenses to the allegation which are most applicable to the wrongdoer include: (a) the alleged victim did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, or (b) the alleged victim consented to being viewed or photographed (whatever the case may be), or (c) the alleged wrongdoer had no intention of invading the person’s privacy, or (d) the alleged wrongdoer neither sought to arouse nor gratify himself.

The victim’s “reasonable expectation of privacy” comports with common sense: She rightfully believed her privacy, private parts, or private behavior were not visible or subject to being photographed, without prior approval.