What Is Peeping Tom Law?
A Peeping Tom law is a colloquial term for a specific type of voyeurism. It can be defined legally as an invasion of privacy involving surveillance of another person in their private place without their consent. The act is characterized by viewing, photographing, videotaping, or recording with the intent to secretly observe or monitor another person. Peeping Tom is a broader term designed to encompass a large variety of illegal voyeuristic conduct. Also, Peeping Tom is not a legal term. In the legal sense, such conduct is identified as voyeurism, surveillance, hidden cameras, and illegal use of cameras. Within this framework, however, almost all definitions include intent to invade privacy or observe another person.
The name Peeping Tom is believed to originate from that of an eye-witness who alone could see what happened to Lady Godiva. Folklore suggests that Lady Godiva rode naked through Coventry, England for the purpose of convincing her husband to reduce their taxes. The only man to peek was named Tom. The act of peeking or spying became more widely known as Peeping Tom. Peeping Tom laws exist in a wide variety of states . They generally criminalize instances of clandestine viewing, photographing, videotaping, recording, or other means by which another person may be secretly observed or monitored. Some states criminalize countless specific exceptions to Peeping Tom laws. For example, in Illinois and Pennsylvania, it is illegal to peek into bathrooms and shower areas, while in North Carolina, Minnesota, Utah, and South Dakota it is illegal to peek into dressing rooms.
Generally speaking, Peeping Tom laws cover a wide range of exemptions. Many states consider exemptions for situations like background noise, remote control, and unattended. For example, if a person were to be spying on someone through a camera control program online, then they may have one of these exemptions. However, if the person set up the camera without the permission of the victim as in the case of a hidden camera or placed a video camera with intent to watch a video stream from the other location, then it likely does not qualify for an exemption. Many modern cameras have sophisticated features. Some cameras have motion detectors, which means the camera will begin recording once a person walks into the room or area. Peeping Tom law often covers this when there is intent to use it or place it in a place it can record unsuspecting people.
Legal Implications for Peeping Tom Statutes
In addition to the social costs and personal trauma to victims, a Peeping Tom conviction has legal consequences for the perpetrators as well. Convictions may lead to fines, imprisonment, or both. However, the penalties vary widely depending on a number of factors.
Criminal Penalties
In most states, peeping, regardless of method, is a crime. However, the penalties for the crime often vary, as some states put such offenses in the context of voyeurism, while others describe the actions specifically as acts of voyeurism.
For example, the crime of clandestine invasion of privacy in Illinois is defined as "knowingly and secretly peep[ing] or peep[ing] through any window or other opening on or within a dwelling place or other building and secretly peek[ing] into the interior of that building." This crime is a Class 4 felony, punishable by one to three years in prison and up to $25,000 in fines.
An example of different coding of the crime is New Jersey Statute 2C:14-9. In New Jersey, voyeurism is defined as one who "observes another person who is unsuspectingly in a place where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy." This crime is a fourth degree criminal offense, carrying a penalty of up to 18 months in prison and up to $10,000 in fines. If the alleged voyeur uses a device to facilitate the crime, then the crime is a third degree. A third degree crime is punishable by three to five years in prison and up to $15,000 in fines.
Civil Penalties
As is the case in many situations, the legal penalties applicable to a Peeping Tom may not be the greatest concern to the perpetrator. In this case, civil lawsuits may cost the most. Violators may also be prevented from finding employment, obtaining professional licenses, living in some areas, buying a house, and more.
How States Differ on Peeping Thomas Laws
While many states have prohibited the use of cameras and other recording devices in private places for many decades, most seem to have adopted these laws with peeping Toms in mind, providing little protection to individuals in public places. For example, Delaware and Washington each include statutes that specifically prohibit photographing an individual in a state where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Hawaii’s Peeping Tom statute includes computer hacking in its list of prohibited acts. New York’s voyeurism statute goes even further, prohibiting the observation of an individual classed as "particularly vulnerable," such as a person with a disability, an older adult, or a minor. The act must be done with the intent to profit from the observing or through an act of "unlawful surveillance." (H § 250.45 Ephemeral Politician) Like New York, North Carolina’s voyeurism law prohibits recording of other persons. Under its law, a person is guilty of a Class E Felony if they use an electronic device or recording to take a photo or record a video or audio for "the purpose of committing a criminal offense or for the purpose of degrading or humiliating a person depicted in the photograph or recorded image or recording." (N.C. § 14-202.1) The majority of states make it illegal for anyone to look through an opening in a door or window. Tennessee’s voyeurism law specifically mentions the use of a drone to sneak a peek. Hon. Timothy L. Church, District Attorney: Blount County-Peeping from Drone. This means that even a drone flying up to the window of a residence could result in criminal liability in Tennessee. For states with more limited voyeurism laws, advocates are introducing additional legislation, like South Carolina’s recently proposed bill. Discrimination or harassment in the workplace may also result in liability for unlawful surveillance. Under Maine’s prohibition of invasive photographing by employers, employers are liable for harm that a worker suffers as a result of "invasive" photographing or taking of video or audio recording in the workplace. (Me. H.P. 258) Given an employer’s duty to provide a safe working environment, many courts will likely find liability exists where an employer either directed, or had actual knowledge, of the invasive surveillance.
Peeping Tom Laws and Invasion of Privacy
Peeping Tom laws have traditionally been seen as a mechanism to protect individual liberties against unwarranted intrusion and scrutiny. However, as technology advances, so do the methods used by Peeping Toms, placing a strain on the protection given under these laws. The use of hidden cameras in private bathrooms and locker rooms in public establishments and businesses has added a layer of complexity to the existing laws, and as a result laws are being enacted to address this contemporary issue. Legislators have attempted to balance the competing interests of protecting privacy and the prosecution of those who seek to harm it . As technology has advanced, Peeping Tom laws have evolved, from the traditional legal definition of Peeping Tom – a person who looks through a narrow opening or hole, especially for the illegal purpose of spying, to those more broadly defined as such by local and state law statutes. Recent cases also demonstrate the clash between the two interests. When a person creates a sexual assault report using surveillance video tape of the incident, it raises a question of whether the peeping Tom was the one committing the violation or if an acceptable workaround on the part of the victim should be permitted. San Diego courts have ruled that the court does not have authority to rule on the constitutionality of law which permits use of surveillance video tape where claim of right had not been established.
Cases and Current Events
Several recent cases have further shaped the legal framework surrounding Peeping Tom laws. For example, in State v. Thompson (2021), the Supreme Court of Maine upheld the conviction of a man who had secretly recorded women in a public restroom. The court concluded that public restrooms are not exempt from these laws, as their primary use still involves an expectation of partial privacy. The case underscored the importance of context in determining what constitutes an unreasonable privacy invasion.
In another significant ruling, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed the issue in Commonwealth v. Nascimento. The court ruled that the defendant’s conviction for illegal recording of a sexual encounter was not based on the mere act of recording. Rather, it emphasized that the recordings must be shown to have been made with the intent to invade the privacy of the victim in an "uncommon way." This nuanced distinction between the intent behind such recordings and the act itself has led to a more comprehensive understanding of what constitutes a Peeping Tom offense.
The recent evolution of Peeping Tom laws has resulted in a marked increase in public awareness and reaction to such crimes. Victims are increasingly coming forward to report these violations, often using social media to raise awareness and rally support against offenders. Additionally, organizations and online platforms have also updated their policies to better protect individuals and penalize offenders.
Protection and Public Awareness
Education and public awareness campaigns play an important role in preventing Peeping Tom incidents and reducing the prevalence of such behaviors. By providing individuals, families, and communities with a greater understanding of the legal boundaries, this enables individuals to better identify warning signs and be proactive in protecting themselves against potential Peeping Tom behavior. Public awareness campaigns and community involvement can be effective in disseminating information about Peeping Tom offenses and the impact of such behavior, as well as in providing resources to those who may be victims of such behavior.
An effective way to prevent Peeping Tom behavior is to maintain proper privacy protocols to ensure that individuals have control over their own personal space. Taking steps to protect your privacy can help you avoid potentially embarrassing or traumatic situations. Some tips for avoiding violations of the Peeping Tom statutes include:
While individuals can take steps to protect themselves from potential Peeping Tom offenses , some offenders may not respond to such efforts or may continue to engage in such behaviors despite receiving proper notice not to do so. In such situations, it may be necessary to seek out the assistance of the proper authorities to ensure that the offending party ceases such behaviors and also to protect any others that may be potential victims of such behavior. This may include filing charges against the perpetrator, seeking out a restraining order, or taking other steps to ensure that the perpetrator removes themselves from any pretext of legal admission to the victim’s private property.