Peeping toms allowed in daylight, Judge says

Press, 12 July 1984, Page 19

Peeping toms allowed in daylight, Judge says

PA Hamilton People undressing in their own homes in the daytime have no legal protection from peeping toms — there is no law against looking through a window into a private home as long as it is not done at night

In the District Court at Hamilton this week, Judge Green dismissed a charge laid against a Waikato University student, Shane Donald Major, aged 20, who denied being unlawfully on property. The complainant said that she had been taking a shower in her flat on Saturday morning when she saw Major looking through the window.

Major, who had permission to enter another flat in

the area, told the court that he had looked through two bathroom windows in the block of flats.

He admitted climbing on a pipe to get to the window and said he knew that what he did was wrong. However, Judge Green said there was no law against it. Major had been charged with being unlawfully on the property but there was a defence to the charge if there was no intention of committing an offence. Counsel, Mr Gavin Boot, said that Major had no intention of going into the building or harming the woman. Judge Green found that there was no law against peeping toms as long as it

was done by daylight. Little doubt existed that the youth’s actions were offensive and could be described as disorderly behaviour. But those charges required that the offences occur in, or within view of, a public place. There was another charge of disorderly behaviour in a private place but that required three or more people to be present “All the youth wanted to do was look at a woman in a state of undress,” Judge Green said. He could find no law that made that an offence during the day. “The defendant, who in my view acted very badly, seems to have not breached the law,” Judge Green said.