Hey creeping scumbag:
Yes, I saw you on Citadel Hill, parking your bicycle under a tree, and then sneaking up as close as possible to two young girls sunbathing and taking pictures. Yes, I stormed up the hill and confronted you. No, you saw nothing wrong with photographing minors without their consent. And yes, I called the police after I got home, and described you to a T. Try it again, please, give them an easy arrest. —Creeped out
This article appears in Jul 8-14, 2010.
my god, finally… someone who actually did something and THEN bitched about it on an anonymous forum. kudos, OP for not just bitching about what you’ll [probably not] do next time you catch this fucker. seriously. good for you. Halifax needs more people like you.
this is the reason why I NEVER go to Queensland beach.
Good on yer, Mate.
hmmmm, that takes care of half the pervs in halisucks, what about the crack dealers too. got an i.d. on them. it’s citadel hill for fucks sake, creeps are there all the time, and if the athing beauties didn’t know that, too fucking bad for their stupidity. everyone knows who and what hangs out up there.
It may have been creepy, but what law did he break?
probably some law involving CHILD PORN you idiot! Let’s see….unknown minors in bathing suits!?
It also violates the FOIP (Freedom of Information and Privacy Laws) that require permission to take pictures of people.
First of all no permission is needed to take photgraphs in public. Second of all, people (children and adults) in swimming suits is not porn unless they’re involved in a sexual act in violation of the Criminal Code. Again creepy but not illegal.
who cares if it’s breaking a law of not? this type of person is obviously capable of doing something, so drawing the law’s eye towards them is a great idea
arguing about the details is pointless… if i caught someone taking pictures of my teenage sister, i’d break a few laws myself
As with everything context is key. Outside of the fact he likely broke privacy laws (consent is necessary I think – from my experience with such things) what he is planning on doing with the pictures matters to me. If he’s posting them somewhere without consent that is plainly wrong. If he’s using them for other, more disgusting ‘private matters’, then wrong doesn’t even begin to describe what I think…
Mod 4.0, did the city ask your permission to film you on the street? The taking of photos is not illegal, unless you show me the Section in the Criminal Code or Privacy Act that states different.I’m sure many of the photos taken by the Coast, herald and other media did not ask those in the photos for permission. Taking the photos is not illegal. As for posting them, I’m sure people have had their photos posted on FB and a myriad of other places without permission. The illegal act occurs if or when he uses them for advertisement (either for legal or illegal goods or services), to defame the person, etc.
Anytime I have knowingly had my picture taken for anything that was going to be used in a film, magazine, or for some kind of promotion I’ve had to sign a consent form. Any time I have used pictures of people for projects I am working on – as Robyn, not as an agent of The Coast – those things fall to others here – I have had to have consent forms for all images. I don’t know the specific laws, although I will look them up in the near future. It’s the taking of pictures without the subject’s consent (especially if they are minors) that is problematic for me, especially because it’s not known what the photos were meant for. In this case I would imagine if lurking is involved the reason for taking them is somewhat suspect. And I said it was wrong, and whether illegal or not I stand by my opinion.
When it comes to taking pictures and publishing them the Canadian Law states that photos cannot be taken and used for profit without consent.
Sadly though, a wanna-be photographer can snap away at anything and anyone and do with them whatever he pleases as long as he does not attempt to sell them.
Besides, why are these young girls suntanning on Citadel? Why not their own property, or a beach where it’s more acceptable?
Oh, and when a minor is involved, the parents have to give consent
Mod 4.0 and Mind Snap, you are right when it comes to commercial use, permission must be gained but anyone can snap pics anywhere for private use.
Once again I didn’t say it was right or not creepy but it is legal.
Of course with our Nanny State, I think we should outlaw all forms of audio and video recorders.
our Nanny State?
you should see what they’re doing in the UK.
Police are being sued all the time for harassing photographers.
here’s a few I could find in about 4 seconds….
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/29/po…
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/10/po…
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/11/po…
we’ve got it pretty good….
and unfortunately while creepy and likely for his own individual ‘intent’, I don’t think this incident was against the law. How did the girls not notice? or did they even care?
Wow, scary indeed zzz!
Never storm up to a pedophile photographing young children on the Hill. Instead, call the police from your cell phone and report them asap. Perps like them need to be caught and thrown in jail.
Minors are anyone under 18. It’s possible that the gals were 16 or 17.
Pedophilia applies to the the attraction of pre-pubescent minors.
Folks, Bro Tim has it right. There is nothing in legislation that requires one to obtain consent before photographing someone else if they’re in public. Had the photos been taken of people who were in “circumstances that give rise to an expectation of privacy” that would be a different story. And as creepy as it might sound, that goes for children as well.
There’s a really good summary of Canadian laws surrounding photography at http://ambientlight.ca/laws.php. Definitely worth a read.
Whether it’s legal or not, it’s still gross, and creepy as fuck!
It’s one thing to be trying to snap scenery pictures and some stranger’s head gets in the way, or parade photos where people expect they might be photographed accidentally by the photog behind them, etc- but it’s a completely different story when someone deliberately seeks you out to take your photo without first asking! If I were one of the girls, I’d have fucking clobbered him.
Good for you, OP!
Could it be considered harassment of sorts in this situation? I think OP did the right thing, whether he was breaking any laws or not.
public mischief ??? harassment ???
Nope to both public mischief and harassment. Unfortunately there’s no law against being creepy as long as the creep violates no law.
teehee, a law against being creepy…50% of my customers would be in the brig^^^
DISCLAIMER: the percentage listed may not be accurate
To add to Bro Tim’s comments, public mischief is basically defined as making false statements to police. The more common form of mischief is vandalism. Harassment (in the criminal sense) is stalking.
Actually…
He’s fully within his legal rights to take that picture. He might be a creep, and you might not agree with what he’s doing, but he’s breaking no law. In fact, the law is quite clear. A photographer, amateur or professional, has the right to take pictures of anything he pleases in public. Consent is only required for commercial gains and publication.
The fact that you automatically assume that there is sexual intent in what could have been a purely innocent photographic image says more about you than it does about him, creep or not.