Australian man fined for snapping topless pix; phone destroyed
By Susan Mernit 
posted December 2nd 2004 6:18AM
posted December 2nd 2004 6:18AM
Like a rabid dog that's gotta be put down for biting, the Nokia
cellphone of a 25-year old man fined $500 ($388US) for snapping pictures of topless women on a Sydney beach
without permission will be destroyed as part of the punishment for his crime. The first person to be arrested
in New South Wales for this offense, Peter Mackenzie's reported M.O was to stroll the beach, pretending to be on a
call, and snap dozens of pictures of sunbathing women. He was caught when one topless sunbather's boyfriend
got suspicious and demanded to see the phone. Busted!
Must suck to be him. I wonder what Nokia he had.
What are cameras for? If you lay on the beach topless you are behaving no less offensivly than anyone using a camera - phone based or digital or film. If the bathers were not behaving offensivly then the man could not have behaved offensivly. The world is going mad.
I'm wondering how the legal system will respond a few years further on, when everybody's sunglasses are recording high-definition stereoscopic video 24 hours a day.
Silly.
If you don't want others to see (and photograph) your boobs, just don't let them hang out.
What's next ? Punishing people for walking with open eyes ?
It would be a different thing if it weren't in public, but that's not the case here.
You say its silly that their upset, I say that the guy had no reason to do what he did. The fact that the beach is a public beach means nothing. Their not there to be photographed.
It's stupid that they go after this guy with a crap mobile phone picture, while paparazzi are being paid thousands for hiding in bushes with telephoto lenses trying to photograph any topless celebs that show up. Bit like destroying a guys PC for downloading one low bit rate MP3 while giving the guy selling pirated CD's a stall.
Well that's cops for you - always go after the easy case...
Australia is a strange country.
I isn't illegal for someone to take a picture of random people is it? As long as he wasnt broadcasting the image or making a profit, he did nothing wrong. If she is in public with her shirt off then who cares if someone takes a picture of her. He wasn't invaded her privacy, she was walking around topless and it was in at a public beach... This is BS and they should buy him a new phone...
So could you get the guy's phone destroyed if you weren't topless? 'Cause if not, then this is a ridiculous case. If it's ok to be topless (and we didn't hear about these women being fined for indecent exposure) then it's no different than being clothed. And somehow I doubt this guy would get a $500 fine if he were simply taking pictures of women on the beach in bathing suits.
Yeah, he would have to get their permission to publish the pictures, but just for "home use"? Hell no. You can take pictures of whatever you damn well please. Like someone else said, if you don't want people looking at your naked body *Don't be naked in public!*. It ain't rocket surgery, folks.
What's the point to have cell phone take picture of nude? Use concept, all cell phone have crap pictures, nothing like good picture from real digital camera. That girl's boyfriend is dumb-whine.
We're going to need every finger we can get to plug all the holes in this collapsing dam.
If you're going to show them, show them! But don't go slamming a guy just for wanting to make that memory last. As the saying goes, "Take a Picture, it will last Longer".
I'm sure what there was a sign posted on this beach that no photos allowed no cameras etc and by using his cellphones camera to sneak pictures in an unauthorized area for photos to be taken, that is why he got fined and his phone destroyed. Destroying the phone part is bullshit I would be kicking ass. The fine is understandable.
It's funny because if the guy was just staring at the woman her boyfriend would have kicked his ass and he would have gotten in trouble, will they destroy my pencil and paper if i draw it?
If you are topless on a beach you have a reasonable expectation not to be photographed.
If she was walking through the CBD topless that's another matter.
If it was a public beach, then there is nothing wrong with taking photographs.
Posted Dec 2, 2004, 10:06 PM ET by Cuba
> If you are topless on a beach you have a reasonable expectation
> not to be photographed.
No, you don't. You're in public. You have no reasonable expectation of privacy when you're in public. That's why they call it _public_. People walk around with cameras taking pictures all the time.
Yes, if there were signs saying "no photographs under penalty of law" then, ok. Stupid, but ok.
What a fuss over these women being topless.
In europe and australia this is totally normal.
I know in america this would make most men drewl their shoes soaking wet. but i guess we europeans and australians are a bit more down to earth.
it is also quite normal not to have anybody take footage of you if you don't want to. fully clothed or not. Some countries have a law, about a persons 'portrait right" this indicates that everybody has the right not to have his picture taken, so if i find anybody taking pictures of me, i can walk up to hem/her and demand these pictures to be destroyed. that goes the same for people filming. if I don't want to be filmed, I am the only one who decides that to happen.
off course destroying the guys phone is a bit over the top. they could have left it at just fining for taking nudity pictures of unsuspecting women.
It wasn't that he was taking photos of topless girls it was that he was taking photos at all. There is no distinction in Australian law of circumstance or dress - privacy is privacy.
Oh and the photo in your story is not of Coogee, but Bondi.
Close but no cigar
>>It wasn't that he was taking photos of topless girls it was that he was taking photos at all.
Crap - the charge was 'behaving offensively in a public place' it was about the fact he was taking photo's of topless girls - you can't be charged with offensive behaviour just for taking photos in a public place.
>>There is no distinction in Australian law of circumstance or dress - privacy is privacy.
Yeah? Could you point out the Aus law that states your privacy rights when you are in a public place??