- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/30/24 at 8:58 pm to Tiger1988
Louisiana Law allows hidden "nanny cams" in private homes without consent of the person being recorded as long as there is no audio.
If he did not use the recording for lewd and lascivious purposes (and he said he used it for security), then this case will be nolle prossed
If he did not use the recording for lewd and lascivious purposes (and he said he used it for security), then this case will be nolle prossed
Posted on 7/30/24 at 8:59 pm to WDAIII
quote:
"The woman told detectives that Toviano had recorded them having sex in the past without her consent and she told him she did not want to be recorded."
That actually makes it worse for him and helps her case significantly.
quote:
You can have a security camera anywhere you want inside your house
Well he isn’t in trouble for have security cameras in his house.
Why are you defending someone who intentionally secretly recorded someone else nude multiple times even after he was specifically told not to?
This post was edited on 7/30/24 at 9:02 pm
Posted on 7/30/24 at 9:00 pm to skullhawk
quote:
He’ll be suspended until his legal issues are settled.
That's what I think...which will be most or all of the year.
Then it will just make more sense for him to move on to another school.
This post was edited on 7/30/24 at 9:08 pm
Posted on 7/30/24 at 10:54 pm to WDAIII
quote:
Louisiana Law allows hidden "nanny cams" in private homes without consent of the person being recorded as long as there is no audio.
If he did not use the recording for lewd and lascivious purposes (and he said he used it for security), then this case will be nolle prossed
If he captured sexual intercourse and she had a reasonable expectation of privacy, it’s a crime regardless of whether it was for “lewd and lascivious purposes.”
A bedroom where you are having sex, regardless of whether at your house or someone else’s, is a place where you very clearly have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
He can’t use the argument that she knew he had already filmed her without consent previously and therefore didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy.. because then he would just be admitting to a separate felony.
Your assertion that you can put a security camera wherever you want inside your home and capture whatever happens without permission is absurd.
This post was edited on 7/30/24 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 7/30/24 at 11:43 pm to lostinbr
LINK
La R.S. 15:1303(C)(4)
Why can't you cite your authority?
So if he recorded only for security purposes, which is what he claims, then he is fine, even without her consent.
By the way, the "victim" should be prosecuted for breaking into his laptop
La R.S. 15:1303(C)(4)
quote:
(4) It shall not be unlawful under this Chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception, unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the United States or of the state or for the purpose of committing any other injurious act.
Why can't you cite your authority?
So if he recorded only for security purposes, which is what he claims, then he is fine, even without her consent.
By the way, the "victim" should be prosecuted for breaking into his laptop
Posted on 7/31/24 at 6:55 am to WDAIII
Why are you posting the statute for audio communications? How is that even relevant here?
The entire reason people say you shouldn’t record audio with security cameras is to avoid having it fall under those types of statutes (because you may inadvertently record audio communications when you aren’t actually a party to the communications).
I already have, but sure I’ll do it again.
RS 14:283
This. Is. Not. True. For the same reason homeowners or business owners can’t put security cameras in bathrooms.
Ok.
So we’ve graduated from “I filmed her without consent previously” to “she shouldn’t have even found the video.”
The entire reason people say you shouldn’t record audio with security cameras is to avoid having it fall under those types of statutes (because you may inadvertently record audio communications when you aren’t actually a party to the communications).
quote:
Why can't you cite your authority?
I already have, but sure I’ll do it again.
RS 14:283
quote:
§283. Video voyeurism; penalties
A. Video voyeurism is any of the following:
(1) The use of any camera, . . . for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the specific instance of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and either:
(a) It is for a lewd or lascivious purpose.
(b) The observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is as described in Paragraph (B)(3) of this Section and occurs in a place where an identifiable person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
. . .
B.
. . .
(3) Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any vaginal or anal sexual intercourse, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, masturbation, any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of any portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva, or genitals shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars and be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year or more than five years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
quote:
So if he recorded only for security purposes, which is what he claims, then he is fine, even without her consent.
This. Is. Not. True. For the same reason homeowners or business owners can’t put security cameras in bathrooms.
quote:
By the way, the "victim" should be prosecuted for breaking into his laptop
Ok. So we’ve graduated from “I filmed her without consent previously” to “she shouldn’t have even found the video.”
This post was edited on 7/31/24 at 6:58 am
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:34 am to WDAIII
quote:
So if he recorded only for security purposes, which is what he claims, then he is fine, even without her consent.
So if my gym was worried about me stealing shampoo, they can legally put hidden cameras in the shower for security purposes?
Again I'll ask, why do you feel the need to defend someone who knowingly recorded someone nude without their consent with a hidden camera after previously being told not to?
This post was edited on 7/31/24 at 8:42 am
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:42 am to FlowMaster
quote:
Obviously want to see justice done, but also need depth at cb..
LOL. You don't give a shite about justice.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:55 am to FlowMaster
ugh, i hate this part of the off-season. it's like we sit around talk about the exact same talking points and pray no one is arrested.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:56 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
LOL. You don't give a shite about justice.
this is tigerdroppings.com
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:58 am to LSBoosie
quote:
So if my gym was worried about me stealing shampoo, they can legally put hidden cameras in the shower for security purposes?
Don't know, not a lawyer
Posted on 7/31/24 at 8:59 am to Bjorn Cyborg
NOT mutually exclusive
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:02 am to LSBoosie
I think what WDA is trying to say is that Toviano (or any other starter on the football team) is acting within the course and scope of his core duties when having sex with a co-ed and that he enjoys absolute immunity for his acts while so engaged.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:10 am to nitwit
What happened to the "well he didn't work inside with AC" defense?
LINK
quote:
"The main reason that I'm doing this is that I refuse to ruin the lives of two young men who have spent their adolescence and their teenage years working and sweating while we were all home in the air conditioning," Jones said.
LINK
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:14 am to WDAIII
quote:
You can have a security camera anywhere you want inside your house
Um no you can't. In fact, when I first started the job I'm currently at some years ago, a few months into the job our tech guy actually got arrested for having one in his bathroom and a girl he had over found out about it.
If you want to do time and be on the registry, then by all means continue to assume you can put a camera anywhere just because it's your house.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:16 am to FlowMaster
She should have kept her pants on.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:19 am to LSBoosie
quote:
Again I'll ask, why do you feel the need to defend someone who knowingly recorded someone nude without their consent with a hidden camera after previously being told not to?
Well, once you've caught someone doing that and then choose to have sex with them again I'm having trouble drumming up any outrage.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:31 am to lostinbr
quote:
A. Video voyeurism is any of the following:
(1) The use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, or an unmanned aircraft system equipped with any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the specific instance of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and either:
This can't be the whole law. This would be unconstitutional to uphold in a public setting. The law must have language that determines if the setting is public or private or a presumption of privacy which you don't have in a public space. In public, I can videotape everyone, regardless of consent. It is part of our constitutional rights to have free speech and free press.
I'm not condoning what he did, I just think you oversimplified the law to the extreme.
Posted on 7/31/24 at 9:53 am to shinerfan
quote:
Well, once you've caught someone doing that and then choose to have sex with them again I'm having trouble drumming up any outrage.
I’m not asking you to be outraged. But I don’t understand why you would defend someone like that.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News