The art of saying what needs to be heard
Justice. A tale as old as time, and one of the foundations the United States was built on. Seems like a simple idea, right?
As you may have heard, a court ruling in Oregon last week cleared a man for taking cell phone pictures directed up the skirt of a 13-year-old girl in a Target. The defense confessed, but claimed it was not technically illegal. The court agreed.
When I read this story, my initial understanding was that a young boy took the pictures. Reading on and finding out the culprit was actually Patrick Buono, a 61-year-old man, my stomach dropped.
I was speechless, and even I realize that as a 14-year-old girl that doesn't happen often. Buono allegedly followed the minor into the Target, then "surreptitiously creeped up behind her and stuck a camera up her skirt," Deputy District Attorney Paul Maloney said, according to the Oregonian.
After Buono confessed, he was charged with two counts of invasion of privacy and two counts of attempted second-degree encouraging child sex abuse. Defense attorney Mark Lawrence said that although his client has confessed, "he's not saying it's moral or right."
"He's very empathetic and feels bad," Lawrence said.
What does empathy have to do with it? Is there truly any doubt that this is not moral or correct? Would he still feel empathetic if he had not been caught? When was the last time empathy, sincere or not, solved a problem? While being empathetic is all good and well, it doesn't address the issue.
You can break and shatter a priceless vase, maybe even try to repair it, but it will never be the same.
Now here comes the real kicker. Judge Eric Butterfield, while labeling Buono's behavior as "appalling and lewd," acquits him of all charges, adding that the girl was wearing underwear and therefore not technically nude. Oregon's invasion of privacy statute requires there to be nudity for a conviction.
Buono's lawyer compared this incident to the iconic pictures of Marilyn Monroe's skirt being blown in an updraft. According to him, this comes down to the first amendment; he argued that in public, no one can expect privacy.
To this I must protest. How are the insides of your clothes, your underwear, public materials? As far as Marilyn Monroe goes, not only had she previously posed nude for Playboy in the past, she was an adult woman at the time who knew what was happening and did the act for publicity, not a girl in middle school who was trying to shop with her mom.
Have we completely forgotten that there are laws prohibiting photographing minors without parental consent? Stalking? The entire ruling of this case absolutely disgusts me beyond belief, and as a female, as a human being, I am absolutely ashamed to call these people our authorities, our leaders. There is no justice here.
