by Anura Guruge
I happened to see the cryptic, provocative message about the Massachusetts High Court ‘upskirt‘ ruling, yesterday morning, at 9 am, on the CNN ticker while watching the news. The ticker message was a teaser. It just did not make any sense to me. How could ‘upskirting’ ever be considered legal? So, I had no choice but to file it away in my mental ‘to do list’ as something to Google. Yesterday was busy, as most Thursday’s tend to be since it is ‘Clearlakes Chorale’ rehearsal night and I need to get Devanee there by 6:59 pm. So that cuts into my work day. Plus yesterday the “Pope John XXIII: 101 Facts & Trivia” book became available in paperback. [I still haven’t done everything I need to do about that launch.] Anyway, this morning around 12:20 am (on my 3rd shift), I did manage to find 6 minutes to check out what this was all about.
Wow. The ruling, per the extant MA laws makes sense! The crux here were that the women were (theoretically) ‘fully’ clothed and were in a public place — moreover, a public place, i.e., a (MBTA) rail service where they should KNOW that there are, if nothing else, security cameras in use! That last part was a kicker — and it played a role. So not only were they in a public place where they had little or no right to privacy, they were in a public place where cameras were taking pictures of them whether they liked it or not. Then it appears that in such a setting, if they are clothed, then it is not illegal — though that is now about to change.
I do have a question. What would have happened if some of the ladies were being a bit ‘daring’. Then the fully clothed argument would go out of the window.
Well, with luck all of this is history since they passed news laws at once. Bravo. Wonder what the laws are in the other states.
I have to say, though, that this was indeed an eye opener!