Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Table of Legislation
- Table of Cases
- List of abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Computer as target
- Part III Fraud and related offences
- Part IV Content-related offences
- Part V Offences against the person
- 11 ‘Grooming’
- 12 Harassment
- 13 Voyeurism
- Part VI Jurisdiction
- Bibliography
- Index
13 - Voyeurism
from Part V - Offences against the person
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2015
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Table of Legislation
- Table of Cases
- List of abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Computer as target
- Part III Fraud and related offences
- Part IV Content-related offences
- Part V Offences against the person
- 11 ‘Grooming’
- 12 Harassment
- 13 Voyeurism
- Part VI Jurisdiction
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Digital voyeurs
The increased miniaturisation of digital technology, the ready availability of recording devices, coupled with the ease with which digital images can be reproduced and uploaded, has led to an apparent increase in conduct which may broadly be described as ‘voyeurism’. Typically, this involves a person surreptitiously observing, and in some cases recording, another person in what would generally be regarded as a private place. For example, the sports centre manager who installed a camera to film women in the shower and using sunbeds, the homeowner who concealed motion-sensitive cameras in the bedroom in order to record his house-sitter, or the stepfather who concealed a video camera to secretly record his adult stepdaughter showering.
Of course, such conduct is not new, and specific ‘Peeping Tom’ statutes have existed in some jurisdictions since at least the beginning of the nineteenth century. Such statutes have, however, been the exception, with most jurisdictions relying upon other offences such as nuisance, stalking, offensive behaviour, public disorder or trespass. That situation has changed in recent years with the enactment of specific voyeurism statutes.
Because it is surreptitious by nature, it is difficult to assess how prevalent voyeurism is. The lack of a specific offence also means it has traditionally not been reflected in official crime statistics. Anecdotally, it seems to be increasing, and while digital technology has not created this phenomenon, it has undoubtedly facilitated it in a number of ways.
First, such technology makes it much easier to engage in covert surveillance. Miniature cameras may easily be concealed in everyday items. Mobile phone cameras are particularly insidious, being so ubiquitous that we accept their presence in areas where a camera would otherwise seem suspicious. For example, digital cameras may be used to capture so-called ‘up-skirt’ and ‘down-blouse’ images. As their names suggest, these are images taken surreptitiously up a woman's skirt or of her cleavage, and are widely available on the internet. While once a person may have concealed themselves underneath a staircase or other vantage point to gain such a view, cameras may now easily be concealed in a bag, or other item, which is then placed at the woman's feet.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Principles of Cybercrime , pp. 454 - 472Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015