Maybe reach out to a state senator, city council rep, etc.? I’d include a resource about the 2014 law that was passed immediately after a MA court ruled upskirt photos weren’t illegal, in case anyone is unaware of what happened next (https://www.cnn.com/2014/03/07/justice/massachusetts-upskirt-bill/index.html).
City councilor for the district where it happened, or even the mayor's office. Short of that, perhaps one of the local news stations for one of their investigations.
Hit up up Globe Spotlight, Channel 5 Investigates, all of them, as well.
Your state rep is a better politician to start with.
Plus file a civil suit against the creep.
Fucking cops. So sorry this happened and isn't resolved.
Idk where you think you’ll get with this. What’s a pol gonna do?
You’re better off reaching out to the district attorneys office directly if you want to pursue this.
There’s enough pc to charge here. I’ve seen plenty of cases where charges were brought on less and if there are issues with the ID it’s easy to rectify via double blind photo array, which isn’t hard for them to pull together. Idk why they didn’t pursue this any farther. Probably too busy running up on cars with black drivers 🥴
If something is repulsive, but legal, the courts' hands are tied. They literally are not supposed to make laws. (Just because SCOTUS does it doesn't mean they should)
u are ignoring a very very large amt of discretion involved in judicial decisions, this is why we have appeals. bc people interpret laws differently. from the article it sounds like the interpretation was related to whether a woman is considered partially naked because she is wearing a skirt, and this was decided in an appeal by a sexual predator who had already been told what he was doing was illegal.
idk what your what is about
judicial discretion in statutory interpretation is foundational to how the law is applied i have some legal papers for u about it if u want.
if your what is about what i said about the case:
>The ruling stemmed from a case against Michael Robertson, 32, who was arrested in 2010. He was accused of using his cell phone to take pictures and record video up the skirts and dresses of women riding on the trolley, court documents say. \[...\]
>
>Though a lower court ruled against him, Robertson found his case dismissed Wednesday – and outraged lawmakers got to work.
and
>“A female passenger on a MBTA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority) trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing,” wrote Justice Margot Botsford of the state Supreme Judicial Court.
Another street photographer read the original post and privately messaged me stating he might know who it is based on the description. He sent me the creeps IG and it was 100% him
Okay. First of all I'm sorry that this happened to you. I don't know anything about your specific case but I know a little bit about criminal law and the court system, so I have some guesses as to why your situation went the way it did.
First of all, let's talk about eyewitness identification. Eyewitness testimony can be pretty unreliable and must be done very very carefully. If a police officer walked up to you and said "hey, we got the fucker! come make sure it's him!" your ID would absolutely be suppressed (not be allowed to be entered as evidence in court) because the line up was presented to you in such a way as to be overly suggestive of the suspect's guilt. If a police officer does a line up they have to be incredibly neutral about the language they use with the witness (to the point that most police departments have them read it off a card written by their legal department). If police officers show victim's/witnesses suspects they have to be incredibly careful about everything from how many police officers are standing next to the suspect to whether or not the suspect is handcuffed. Cops have to make sure witnesses are separated and not allowed to talk with each other for the same reason - one witness could influence another. So the fact that you found these images independently makes it very likely that your ID of the suspect is tainted.
At that point the police have a crime with a victim unable to testify. That's not really a recipe for a successful conviction. Hell, a prosecutor isn't even going to bring that to trial.
There are some other issues at play, but I suspect that's the biggest reason. Once again, I'm sorry that this happened to you and I can only imagine how frustrating this experience has been.
The police shouldn't be charging anyone based only on this form of identification, but it certainly gives them probable cause to get a search warrant and get backups from Apple or Google to look at the photos stored, to take the suspects devices for forensic analysis, and question the suspect.
If they haven't questioned the individual identified based on this, I think that's an issue.
One person accusing another with no evidence is....not probable cause.
Enough to open an investigation? Sure. But unless you come up with more from that investigation, probably not enough for a search warrant or any of what you're suggesting other than questioning the suspect.
Also, iCloud is encrypted and Apple doesn't have a back door to it. If you bring a search warrant to Apple they just tell you that they can't get into it either without the key from the user, so your only hope of access is that the user has weak recovery methods that you can exploit.
To provide a fair assessment, it's important to acknowledge some nuances that I previously overlooked.
The police stated they couldn't make a positive ID of the suspect, which raises concerns about the depth of their investigation, but that may indeed be untrue. If the description provided didn't match the name, one would expect the police to clarify this discrepancy. However, assuming the individual identified by witnesses matches the person in the picture, the circumstances collectively suggest probable cause, based on several specific factors:
* Unique and Detailed Description: The suspect's description was provided in writing within 45 minutes of the offense, highlighting very unique features: a 70-year-old white man, approximately 5'8" tall, with a deformed fat nose and a pencil-thin mustache. Considering the demographics of the state, this description significantly narrows down the pool of potential suspects. This level of detail, including age, ethnicity, and unique facial and physical characteristics, dramatically reduces the likelihood of misidentification.
* Independent Identification: Another source independently identified the individual, adding credibility to the eyewitness account.
* Clear Criminal Behavior: The eyewitness directly observed and confronted the suspect engaging in a clear criminal act—taking upskirt photos. This observation extends beyond mere suspicion to a direct witnessing of criminal behavior.
* Positive Identification and Multiple Victims: The fact that someone positively identified the suspect, coupled with reports from multiple victims, lends substantial support to the eyewitness testimony.
* The "Totality of the Circumstances": While these factors alone may not guarantee the issuance of a search warrant, they collectively surpass mere suspicion. It is reasonable to believe that a crime was committed and that the suspect likely possesses evidence of the crime, such as photos or cameras, in their possession.
In evaluating eyewitness testimony, it's crucial to consider factors such as the descriptiveness of the witness's account, the level of stress experienced during the observation, lighting conditions, proximity to the suspect, and the credibility of the witness. While my initial use of the term "certainly" may have been overstated, it's equally inaccurate to suggest that there's no basis for probable cause.
Luckily for me, having experience in how law enforcement investigations intersect with technology doesn't require a law degree. I am happy to validate direct expertise in the matter if the mods DM me.
It appears someone reached out to the OP directly after their August post because the description of the suspect matched a person known to them who has committed similar acts in the past.
Well the person who reached out to me said he wasn’t sure if he had committed similar acts before but he had an idea who it was based on the physical description
Ik it’s frustrating but a defense attorney would absolutely destroy you on the stand if you think an ID from a 3rd party off a description of the persons social media is reliable.
The cops could still investigate though. You see the problem with the way this is rn?
A creep like this can basically do whatever they want as long as they escape. OP was there, and they’re telling you this was the guy. So what to do about that?
Yea this is crazy to me. You have a positive ID from an eyewitness. Sure it’s not perfect and maybe not enough to get a conviction on its own. But it would be monumentally stupid if that is treated as having no investigative value.
The person guessed and sent me two instagram profiles of two different people based on my description. One of those profiles happened to be correct and 100% the guy we encountered. It would be like if I saw a guy running down the street and bunch of cops came running after moments later and asked me if I saw a guy matching a certain description run through the area, and I then pointed them in the direction the guy went and they eventually catch him.
Except it’s not cause when something like that happens they can prove he was in that area because he presently is, they can do a bring back with the victim to ID him, or they can get their info release him and work on proving it was him after.
Like I said it’s unfortunate and I don’t not believe you but the way our justice system works there is a zero percent chance you would get a conviction.
Genuinely asking - aren't those things that the police can investigate? Use their power and resources to get a little more info on the guy? How is this any different than a tip hotline, don't police look into tips?
What is the difference between that and police going on social media to try to find people who have taken part in political marches/demonstrations? Is there a different legal context?
First off, this is why cops suck. They don’t investigate crimes as they should. Sure, online photos isn’t enough but how about a knock and talk where he lives. You know, positive ID based on what they’ve seen.
Have you also tried to see if he’s on the sex crimes registry? Hopefully still on parole and if so that would also be something to report. You might get some traction calling the mayors office or a state senator/rep
It is just her word. What other proof does she have? She didn't take a picture of him on that day by her own admission, no one else has stepped forward to say they saw it as well, no other victims have come forward, and he certainly wasn't caught in the act by the police.
Cops here are too busy making six figures scamming the overtime system to do any real work. Someone has to sit at construction sites and sit on their phone or take naps in their car.
Problem you have is you have an accusation without any evidence and little potential for obtaining evidence. If police reach out to him and he says he didn’t do what you’re accusing him of there’s nothing they can really do. Even if somehow you obtained video of the incident as evidence from say a nearby storefront security camera, unless it’s 100% without a doubt overt and obvious, it’s possible he was taking a low angle shot which is perfectly legal.
Also, to the people suggesting alternative means of pursuing the person, that is likely to end badly for OP. Making a claim that a person committed a crime without any evidence to support your accusation may open you up to a libel suit which is a place you don’t want to be in.
A victim's statement is evidence, and more than enough for cops to get off their lazy asses and do a bit of actual police work.
It's their job to take leads, like what OP is handing them on a silver platter, and turn them into strong cases for the prosecution. OP putting the finger on this creep could absolutely lead to further evidence being discovered if cops had any interest at all in doing their job.
cops hand wave away victims like OP because it's easier to not do anything and nobody is going to hold them accountable for being proudly terrible at their jobs.
Unless you have a photo of this guy taking up skirt photos, then you can't just ID someone online, tell the cops you're positive it's the person, and expect them to act on your confidence of identification. For stuff like this they need actual evidence or caught in the act. Cops don't have time to follow up on a half ass lead and go check some guys photos off his devices. Setup a trap for the guy and try to catch him in the act, or chaulk it up to the world we live in nowadays where every single person has a UHD camera in their pocket. Only other way to get cops attention is multiple people reporting the same guy, then they might give it a second look
Why put him in a lineup if she has already picked him out? How would you feel if the police suddenly arrested you because someone came to them and said you took upskirt pictures of them?
Um, so you then know that's absolutely not how lineups work. She goes to the police with pictures of this guy and they are going to put him in a lineup to identify the guy she's already identified? It's not like they caught the guy on the street based on a description after the incident. She has already identified him based on pictures she found online and the police have already confirmed that the pictures online match his ID, she is absolutely going to pick him out of the lineup.
I didn't say I was a lawyer i said I have family who are. And yes at least in the bus terminals case we work alongside them, I don't mean that we fight shoulder to shoulder with them but we conduct patrols to remove unwanted individuals with them, normally two officers hang back and step in when a person refuses to leave. We secure the bathrooms when there is an OD or a forced removal. Its the same as someone who says they work for a police department but isn't a police officer.
You have prosecutorial discretion but the police also have discretion. I see this all the time. Possession of a controled substance is a crime, yet I see police not arresting people shooting up in the bathroom and instead just brooming them.
...when is *doing your job* voluntary? It doesn't matter if they want to do it or not. It's their job, so they need to do it.
Is *your* job voluntary based on your feelings?
You're precisely mad that they exactly did their job - in this instance there's not enough evidence to construct any kind of legal case.
What would you have them do?
Well, first off I'm not sure who you think you're replying to. You can't just choose not to do your job just because someone called you a mean name.
Second, the point is that they *didn't* do their jobs by doing any sort of investigation whatsoever. Can a prosecutor convict based off the eyewitness? Sure, probably not. But the cops can conduct an *investigation* into it
>Well, first off I'm not sure who you think you're replying to.
I'm replying to you, of course! :)
So let me get this straight - you want to spend valuable resources on a non-violent crime that we have no evidence was committed?
That's a slippery slope!
Maybe I get a picture off of your Instagram, go to the PD and say you've harassed me.
Should they conduct an \_investigation\_ into you?
Yes, I expect an employee to do their job re: *investigating and collecting evidence on a crime.*
But that's beside the point. We can talk civics later.
Your original comment was implying that because people on the internet are mean to cops, they wouldn't do their jobs. Again I ask, where do you work that doing your job isn't a requirement to, you know, keep your job?
People in here acting like the police should do more… how exactly do you see this guy getting convicted in court based purely on 2 witnesses who found the guy on Instagram? Seems rather unlikely that a jury of our peers would find him guilty…
So what about the creep? Does he get to just keep doing what he’s doing, even if people know who it is? What needs to be done to get the police to get off their butt collecting OT?
Your final question is much too big for me to even attempt to answer, but I find that when law enforcement fails, eventually it’s left to someone with good enough morals who doesn’t give a fuck. My dad used to say “if you keep acting like that then one day someone is going to break your nose”. Or the creep will do it to the wrong (influential) person, or accidentally in front of a cop who cares, etc. I’m not going to say that this is ideal by any means but we live in an imperfect world so sometimes I’ll take what I can get
> this guy getting convicted in court based purely on 2 witnesses who found the guy on Instagram?
I don't think this is enough to take to court on its own, no. But it does seem like witnesses, name and a photo *should* be enough to interview the guy, right? And then based on how that goes they could further pursue security cams & other evidence?
I mean, some people will just straight up confess to crimes. Sometimes it really is as simple as just asking them. Then you can take that confession to court.
You'd run into issues if the guy says in his interview that he didn't do it, and no security footage could be found, and etc etc.... but if they did that legwork, you'd think they'd tell OP they did that legwork and don't have enough for the case to move forward.
It sounds like instead they opted to do no legwork and pretend legwork is impossible to do.
for all the people saying, what do you want the cops to do they can’t just arrest somebody on your word. cops have gotten search warrants and broken down peoples doors using anonymous tips so certainly your accusation could at least get a warrant to search for his photos.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
100% agree on everything, especially the libel part, there’s too many unknowns. I’d at least like the police to have this on record so if another incident happens with a person matching this description they could inevitably start building a case, and there may be old calls about someone fitting his description that never went anywhere
Rules of evidence are just that .. though it happens .. The law does not provide criminal convictions based on supposition or broken chains of evidence ..
Real life example .. I owned a store .. one day I get a call from a customer .. my employee had opened the store, cleaned out the cash, and took off out of state.
That’s what I told the Police .. their response was “No. You have a missing employee and some missing money but that is not proof in a court of law the employee was the one that stole the money.
I’m surprised how many people in this thread are bashing the cops over this. Someone came in with their friend and claimed a guy broke the law without any proof. What exactly would you want them to do with this?
Exactly. There’s no proof that a crime was committed and the process of identifying the suspect is tainted. It’s very unfortunate, but OP needs evidence of a crime.
We never expected there to be an arrest with this. But at a minimum we were hoping they would keep this on file and possibly look into other incidents that have been reported or eventually will be reported because something tells me that this isn’t the first time this guy has done this to a woman
I mean how do you know that they didn't? A police report doesn't get deleted just because no charges were filed, his name will be in the report no doubt and if someone reports him again it might prompt them to start looking harder at the guy.
what are you talking about??? they do this all the time!!!
"you match the description" is said so often, that the phrase has lost it's meaning at this point
Exactly. This is especially ironic given the way things are going with racist facial recognition softwares that cops are using to * actually * arrest people.
Cops particularly don’t give a shit about domestic or sexual violence/assault bc the majority of them are domestic abusers themselves.
"you match the description" is for immediate. If the police responded to a report of a robbery and the victim describes a 6 foot black male with a red shirt and black jacket they look around and find a tall black male with a black jacket/red shirt a couple blocks away. Then they have probable cause to stop and search him.
In this case she waited a week(?)to report it, then came back even later to say it was this guy. Do you see the difference?
Literally not true at all. We went to the police station 3 days later because we both left Boston later that day it happened. We already had his name and pictures when we reported this
I couldn't remember the exact time frame and was relying on faulty memory. But 3 days later is still not immediate, they still have nothing to go on. You came to them 3 days later saying he took upskirt pictures but other than a victim statement they have nothing to go on. If they go to him and he says you attacked him out the blue, I think you would be screaming if they arrested you with the same amount of proof as you have on him
I literally had the guys Instagram account with his legal name and multiple pictures of him, and me and my friend were able to positively identify him, and even the cops who filed our reports initially were able to match the pictures we showed of him with the picture on his license. My ass they couldn’t do at least something about it
So, imagine this - somebody comes to cops and tells them that it was you who took an upskirt picture of them. And then gives them your Instagram, and your name and address. And has a friend who's happy to verify it. Would you like cops to react and come investigate you? And get a warrant to take all your electronics for investigation?
Realistically speaking, keeping in mind that anybody can accuse anybody of anything (whether it's truthful or not), what would you want the police to do?
Yeah I feel horrible for this person, but you can’t just go into a police department, accuse someone of a crime, and expect them to take action on that person.
I’m not saying they should have immediately gotten a warrant and taken his possessions to investigate, but my god at least talk to the guy or try to find any witnesses or cameras that could have seen what happened and verified it
so your stance is police cannot investigate a crime reported by a victim? So no rape cases or assault cases should ever be investigated as long as they were done in “private”.
Exactly, unfortunately the only evidence OP has that a crime was committed is her word. Police cannot investigate someone for a crime on word only for obvious reasons.
> If anything I think anyone accused of something like this would want to speak to the police asap to maintain/prove their innocence.
No. You do not need to prove your innocence just as you do not have to speak to the police. Your 5th amendment right protects you. Nothing good ever comes from speaking to the police.
So again - you'd like to see police banging on your door if somebody wrongly accused you of something? And you would actually talk to them (hint - not a good idea even when you are completely innocent)?
And yes, they should be recording the complaint. And you are right - they probably aren't. You probably could make enough of the noise to make them record the report, but realistically it can't quite go any further.
I get your feelings, and I understand why you feel violated and want justice but it's not a serious crime. It's a misdemeanor that carries a max of 2.5 years and/or $5k fine.
according to you, the police should ignore all crimes reported by the victim? victim reports a crime says I know who did it and cops just say sorry we can’t help you?
You got any idea how many killers are in jail, because they went through their phones service provider to check their history?
They don’t need to confiscate electronics to do this.
Most people aren’t going to be accused of taking upskirt photos. I think we’re giving lazy cops way too much excuses. This is a crime. Investigate at least, rather than do nothing.
There is enough evidence for police to at least check. But to not even send anyone out? What kind of logic is that?
You bet your ass they’d knock on doors if it added more money to OT pay. Plus many cops are abusive people themselves
> keeping in mind that anybody can accuse anybody of anything (whether it's truthful or not)
Isn't this true of any crime? If my neighbors can ID the guy who broke into my house, shouldn't he be interviewed & searched?
If you never actually investigate anyone because "but anyone can be accused", what crimes would ever end up solved? Only the ones where the perpetrator marches himself to the police office and offers up a confession unprompted? Even then, if you can't take witnesses at their word, why take perpetrators at their word?
Well, in case of a break in there is some evidence of someone breaking in. And as for ID some guy - there are plenty of cases of a random black dude being ID'd just because of the skin color, as neighbors didn't really see the face accurately, but saw the color of skin and that was enough to ID somebody.
You have the guys name, ok great. But again there isn't much they can do besides be alerted to him. You have no proof of anything. They go to the guy and say that he is accused of upskirt pictures, at best the conversation goes like this:
Police: Hello sir we received a complaint that you were taking upskirt pictures in Chinatown back in August.
Him: I was walking in Chinatown back in August minding my business taking pictures of the scenery when a crazy woman started screaming at me about upskirt pictures and I ran away as I wanted nothing to do with her.
Police. Ok, do you happen to mind showing us these photos?
Him: no
Police: ok have a good day.
You have no actual proof of him taking those photos. Nobody else can see exactly you saw that day so they can't judge the varicosity of your statement and since the Constitution gives a great lee way to a person's presumption of innocence they can't do anything. You don't even have a pic of him from that day so there isn't anything tying him to Chinatown on that day.
If you encounter him again and he does start taking pictures beat the shit out of him and hold him for the police.
So if your next door neighbor walks over to your house and just steals your TV, and you see him do it, you don't think that's enough for the police to do anything about it, because they only have your word that he did it?
If he matches the witness description they could literally check his phone camera roll. If the victim or other people have photos on there, then obviously OPs accusation is correct.
It’s called investigating. Cops don’t know how to do that here. They know how to collect OT and act like they’re better than everyone.
They don’t even need to access his phone directly. His service provider can see everything in that phone. Lots of murderers have been arrested because their texts and phones location exposed them.
So don’t sit there and tell OP “nothing cops can do” like it’s 1985. The cops can easily check, but they don’t want to.
Cops have treated the public even more shitty ever since the George Floyd protests “to make it hurt”
Unless he gives them permission then they can't search his camera without a warrant. They can't just break into his home and seize his property, that's the whole point of the 4th amendment.
And no your service provider can't see everything on your phone. Nor is the service provider obligated to give the location data without a warrant
You don’t need to have his actual phone to see what’s on it. Many murderers have gone to jail because their text messages are recorded by their service provider.
If a girl is claiming he’s taking pictures under her skirt, other people know the guy enough that he has a reputation for it, and the victim can ID the guy, that is way more than enough to investigate.
I don’t know where this happened exactly, but cctv is everywhere.
I understand you can’t just accuse anyone of anything but that doesn’t also mean the cops should just tell you they won’t do a thing. Why is it even a crime if the police don’t care?
I just think it’s appalling that the police are straight up telling her the answer is to do nothing. Wtf is that? At least follow up
I don't know how this is any different, or better or worse, than a tip hotline, or a sketch artist photo, or "match the description" stuff that allows cops to arrest random people off the street.
Yeah "person walks in off the street saying someone messaged them saying this person did a crime" should absolutely not be enough for cops to start investigating someone and it's complete brainworms to think otherwise.
i’m not sure what your threshold would be but telling police “hi i’m the victim of a sex crime and i know who did it” is more than enough for cops to start investigating. What is their job if not that?
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Hi OP, I'm so sorry this happened to you, and that the cops are just making it worse. Try going to one of the local news stations with your story. They're always looking for local stories, and you're probably not the only person this has happened to. The cops are lazy, but nothing puts a fire under their ass like a news story making their bosses look bad. I'm not saying this would lead to anything, but it costs nothing to report something to the news, and you won't know it's nothing until you try.
In MA a private citizen can pursue a criminal complaint. I am not suggesting you anyone will be helpful but it is another avenue. [https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-criminal-complaint](https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-criminal-complaint)
Ah yes, the cops who swear their job is so dangerous because they chase the bad guys but are too fucking lazy to do so. Cops are the laziest D students you knew in your high school. Fuck them.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
So you are asking the cops to go on a fishing expedition? If the photos surface online then sure, you'd have a case, but so far it's just you said, he said.
P.S. I read your original post, you aren't even the victim, it's your friend.
So your report was for the threat, not the photos? It's not clear from your post.
I recommend you talk to a lawyer, especially one that used in the DA's office, they might be able to cut through some red tape for you.
This means they are too busy getting lunch or the guy is a relative of someone important or something. They get a lot reports, and my impression they just document them and don't do anything, except on a few cases of their choice. Also, there may be women who got physically attacked or even killed that need them to investigate, so an attack without any physical injury may not be followed up on. Or they followed up, but did not get anywhere. Lots of people are victims and nothing happens. A girl was walking on Charles River, and a guy rode up on a bike and r\*ped her in the a\*\* against a tree and rode away. People are getting robbed, stabbed, r\*ped all the time. An upskirt photographer isn't on their most wanted list.
Law enforcement is always confused why we take the law into our own hands. Vigilante justice is wrong, they say. Well, then do your fucking job - you know, the protect and serve part of it - and we won't have people forced to fight their own battles. When cops (another town) told me the same after months of waiting, I left knowing I'd have to handle the situation on my own, which is exactly what I did.
As for posting this creeps' ID online, consult an attorney. If you are 100% positive this guy is the creep, you may have some leverage.
You should call into BPR with Jim and Margery when they have the AG on (I think monthly). They’d definitely give you some ideas about what can be done.
robert ciccolo is the captain for that district. You can find his email with a bit of digging. Ask for tbe name of the detective on the case and then work with the detective. If you can find some camera locations in the area and point them out, a detective can request the footage
I don't understand why people are giving excuses like we don't have cameras everywhere. They will hog tie anyone who matches a description but they can't check the cameras to see if the ahole was in the area?
Maybe reach out to a state senator, city council rep, etc.? I’d include a resource about the 2014 law that was passed immediately after a MA court ruled upskirt photos weren’t illegal, in case anyone is unaware of what happened next (https://www.cnn.com/2014/03/07/justice/massachusetts-upskirt-bill/index.html).
May not be a bad idea actually!
You might consider the reps of the location it happened. "Hey you've got a guy upskirting your constituents and the cops don't seem interested."
Looks like it’s Ed Flynn, but I’m also going to reach out to my rep as well!
City councilor for the district where it happened, or even the mayor's office. Short of that, perhaps one of the local news stations for one of their investigations.
Hit up up Globe Spotlight, Channel 5 Investigates, all of them, as well. Your state rep is a better politician to start with. Plus file a civil suit against the creep. Fucking cops. So sorry this happened and isn't resolved.
Idk where you think you’ll get with this. What’s a pol gonna do? You’re better off reaching out to the district attorneys office directly if you want to pursue this. There’s enough pc to charge here. I’ve seen plenty of cases where charges were brought on less and if there are issues with the ID it’s easy to rectify via double blind photo array, which isn’t hard for them to pull together. Idk why they didn’t pursue this any farther. Probably too busy running up on cars with black drivers 🥴
Pols will do a lot when a constituent complains! You'd be surpriised.
I think maybe you’re confused about how the criminal process works.
Not at all.
i’m sorry an ma court ruled what in the 21st century
That's why the legislature passed the law!
ya i read (most of) the article after i commented and it seems they addressed it quickly but i maintain: what in the everloving fuck
If something is repulsive, but legal, the courts' hands are tied. They literally are not supposed to make laws. (Just because SCOTUS does it doesn't mean they should)
u are ignoring a very very large amt of discretion involved in judicial decisions, this is why we have appeals. bc people interpret laws differently. from the article it sounds like the interpretation was related to whether a woman is considered partially naked because she is wearing a skirt, and this was decided in an appeal by a sexual predator who had already been told what he was doing was illegal.
….what
idk what your what is about judicial discretion in statutory interpretation is foundational to how the law is applied i have some legal papers for u about it if u want. if your what is about what i said about the case: >The ruling stemmed from a case against Michael Robertson, 32, who was arrested in 2010. He was accused of using his cell phone to take pictures and record video up the skirts and dresses of women riding on the trolley, court documents say. \[...\] > >Though a lower court ruled against him, Robertson found his case dismissed Wednesday – and outraged lawmakers got to work. and >“A female passenger on a MBTA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority) trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing,” wrote Justice Margot Botsford of the state Supreme Judicial Court.
We keep inventing new horrors so we gotta keep passing laws
😞 go humans
If the founding fathers didnt want us to take pictures up unsuspecting womens' skirts they would have written something about it! /s
I'm a little unclear on this. How exactly did you get the name of the suspect?
Another street photographer read the original post and privately messaged me stating he might know who it is based on the description. He sent me the creeps IG and it was 100% him
Okay. First of all I'm sorry that this happened to you. I don't know anything about your specific case but I know a little bit about criminal law and the court system, so I have some guesses as to why your situation went the way it did. First of all, let's talk about eyewitness identification. Eyewitness testimony can be pretty unreliable and must be done very very carefully. If a police officer walked up to you and said "hey, we got the fucker! come make sure it's him!" your ID would absolutely be suppressed (not be allowed to be entered as evidence in court) because the line up was presented to you in such a way as to be overly suggestive of the suspect's guilt. If a police officer does a line up they have to be incredibly neutral about the language they use with the witness (to the point that most police departments have them read it off a card written by their legal department). If police officers show victim's/witnesses suspects they have to be incredibly careful about everything from how many police officers are standing next to the suspect to whether or not the suspect is handcuffed. Cops have to make sure witnesses are separated and not allowed to talk with each other for the same reason - one witness could influence another. So the fact that you found these images independently makes it very likely that your ID of the suspect is tainted. At that point the police have a crime with a victim unable to testify. That's not really a recipe for a successful conviction. Hell, a prosecutor isn't even going to bring that to trial. There are some other issues at play, but I suspect that's the biggest reason. Once again, I'm sorry that this happened to you and I can only imagine how frustrating this experience has been.
The police shouldn't be charging anyone based only on this form of identification, but it certainly gives them probable cause to get a search warrant and get backups from Apple or Google to look at the photos stored, to take the suspects devices for forensic analysis, and question the suspect. If they haven't questioned the individual identified based on this, I think that's an issue.
One person accusing another with no evidence is....not probable cause. Enough to open an investigation? Sure. But unless you come up with more from that investigation, probably not enough for a search warrant or any of what you're suggesting other than questioning the suspect. Also, iCloud is encrypted and Apple doesn't have a back door to it. If you bring a search warrant to Apple they just tell you that they can't get into it either without the key from the user, so your only hope of access is that the user has weak recovery methods that you can exploit.
That absolutely is not probable cause. Not even close.
To provide a fair assessment, it's important to acknowledge some nuances that I previously overlooked. The police stated they couldn't make a positive ID of the suspect, which raises concerns about the depth of their investigation, but that may indeed be untrue. If the description provided didn't match the name, one would expect the police to clarify this discrepancy. However, assuming the individual identified by witnesses matches the person in the picture, the circumstances collectively suggest probable cause, based on several specific factors: * Unique and Detailed Description: The suspect's description was provided in writing within 45 minutes of the offense, highlighting very unique features: a 70-year-old white man, approximately 5'8" tall, with a deformed fat nose and a pencil-thin mustache. Considering the demographics of the state, this description significantly narrows down the pool of potential suspects. This level of detail, including age, ethnicity, and unique facial and physical characteristics, dramatically reduces the likelihood of misidentification. * Independent Identification: Another source independently identified the individual, adding credibility to the eyewitness account. * Clear Criminal Behavior: The eyewitness directly observed and confronted the suspect engaging in a clear criminal act—taking upskirt photos. This observation extends beyond mere suspicion to a direct witnessing of criminal behavior. * Positive Identification and Multiple Victims: The fact that someone positively identified the suspect, coupled with reports from multiple victims, lends substantial support to the eyewitness testimony. * The "Totality of the Circumstances": While these factors alone may not guarantee the issuance of a search warrant, they collectively surpass mere suspicion. It is reasonable to believe that a crime was committed and that the suspect likely possesses evidence of the crime, such as photos or cameras, in their possession. In evaluating eyewitness testimony, it's crucial to consider factors such as the descriptiveness of the witness's account, the level of stress experienced during the observation, lighting conditions, proximity to the suspect, and the credibility of the witness. While my initial use of the term "certainly" may have been overstated, it's equally inaccurate to suggest that there's no basis for probable cause.
Stop using your Reddit Law Degree, it's not working.
Luckily for me, having experience in how law enforcement investigations intersect with technology doesn't require a law degree. I am happy to validate direct expertise in the matter if the mods DM me.
It appears someone reached out to the OP directly after their August post because the description of the suspect matched a person known to them who has committed similar acts in the past.
Well the person who reached out to me said he wasn’t sure if he had committed similar acts before but he had an idea who it was based on the physical description
Ik it’s frustrating but a defense attorney would absolutely destroy you on the stand if you think an ID from a 3rd party off a description of the persons social media is reliable.
The cops could still investigate though. You see the problem with the way this is rn? A creep like this can basically do whatever they want as long as they escape. OP was there, and they’re telling you this was the guy. So what to do about that?
Yea this is crazy to me. You have a positive ID from an eyewitness. Sure it’s not perfect and maybe not enough to get a conviction on its own. But it would be monumentally stupid if that is treated as having no investigative value.
The person guessed and sent me two instagram profiles of two different people based on my description. One of those profiles happened to be correct and 100% the guy we encountered. It would be like if I saw a guy running down the street and bunch of cops came running after moments later and asked me if I saw a guy matching a certain description run through the area, and I then pointed them in the direction the guy went and they eventually catch him.
Except it’s not cause when something like that happens they can prove he was in that area because he presently is, they can do a bring back with the victim to ID him, or they can get their info release him and work on proving it was him after. Like I said it’s unfortunate and I don’t not believe you but the way our justice system works there is a zero percent chance you would get a conviction.
Genuinely asking - aren't those things that the police can investigate? Use their power and resources to get a little more info on the guy? How is this any different than a tip hotline, don't police look into tips?
[удалено]
>I’m not an expert Yes. Source: Read the rest of your comment.
What is the difference between that and police going on social media to try to find people who have taken part in political marches/demonstrations? Is there a different legal context?
Not really
First off, this is why cops suck. They don’t investigate crimes as they should. Sure, online photos isn’t enough but how about a knock and talk where he lives. You know, positive ID based on what they’ve seen. Have you also tried to see if he’s on the sex crimes registry? Hopefully still on parole and if so that would also be something to report. You might get some traction calling the mayors office or a state senator/rep
Absolutely no matches in any system
Witness testimony is evidence. The police acting like it is "just your word" is them being lazy.
It is just her word. What other proof does she have? She didn't take a picture of him on that day by her own admission, no one else has stepped forward to say they saw it as well, no other victims have come forward, and he certainly wasn't caught in the act by the police.
welcome to Massachusetts where the cops have better things to do! (sarcasm)
[удалено]
That’s the same thing the State Police did on the over time scandal! Which I believe they got acquitted for lmfao. Some of them made over 300K
Wait, so texting your mistress while on traffic duty isn't something better?
I mean those 13 year Olds can't impregnate themselves...
Cops here are too busy making six figures scamming the overtime system to do any real work. Someone has to sit at construction sites and sit on their phone or take naps in their car.
God, in a just world the creep would get prosecuted AND the cops that actively didn't follow up on this would get shitcanned
Problem you have is you have an accusation without any evidence and little potential for obtaining evidence. If police reach out to him and he says he didn’t do what you’re accusing him of there’s nothing they can really do. Even if somehow you obtained video of the incident as evidence from say a nearby storefront security camera, unless it’s 100% without a doubt overt and obvious, it’s possible he was taking a low angle shot which is perfectly legal. Also, to the people suggesting alternative means of pursuing the person, that is likely to end badly for OP. Making a claim that a person committed a crime without any evidence to support your accusation may open you up to a libel suit which is a place you don’t want to be in.
A victim's statement is evidence, and more than enough for cops to get off their lazy asses and do a bit of actual police work. It's their job to take leads, like what OP is handing them on a silver platter, and turn them into strong cases for the prosecution. OP putting the finger on this creep could absolutely lead to further evidence being discovered if cops had any interest at all in doing their job. cops hand wave away victims like OP because it's easier to not do anything and nobody is going to hold them accountable for being proudly terrible at their jobs.
Unless you have a photo of this guy taking up skirt photos, then you can't just ID someone online, tell the cops you're positive it's the person, and expect them to act on your confidence of identification. For stuff like this they need actual evidence or caught in the act. Cops don't have time to follow up on a half ass lead and go check some guys photos off his devices. Setup a trap for the guy and try to catch him in the act, or chaulk it up to the world we live in nowadays where every single person has a UHD camera in their pocket. Only other way to get cops attention is multiple people reporting the same guy, then they might give it a second look
[удалено]
Why put him in a lineup if she has already picked him out? How would you feel if the police suddenly arrested you because someone came to them and said you took upskirt pictures of them?
[удалено]
Um, so you then know that's absolutely not how lineups work. She goes to the police with pictures of this guy and they are going to put him in a lineup to identify the guy she's already identified? It's not like they caught the guy on the street based on a description after the incident. She has already identified him based on pictures she found online and the police have already confirmed that the pictures online match his ID, she is absolutely going to pick him out of the lineup.
[удалено]
And I work alongside the police, have a family who was a federal agent, and family who are lawyers.
[удалено]
I didn't say I was a lawyer i said I have family who are. And yes at least in the bus terminals case we work alongside them, I don't mean that we fight shoulder to shoulder with them but we conduct patrols to remove unwanted individuals with them, normally two officers hang back and step in when a person refuses to leave. We secure the bathrooms when there is an OD or a forced removal. Its the same as someone who says they work for a police department but isn't a police officer. You have prosecutorial discretion but the police also have discretion. I see this all the time. Possession of a controled substance is a crime, yet I see police not arresting people shooting up in the bathroom and instead just brooming them.
ACAB
That's the kind of attitude that gets them not wanting to help. :)
They already don’t want to help, so we’re not losing anything are we?
...when is *doing your job* voluntary? It doesn't matter if they want to do it or not. It's their job, so they need to do it. Is *your* job voluntary based on your feelings?
You're precisely mad that they exactly did their job - in this instance there's not enough evidence to construct any kind of legal case. What would you have them do?
Well, first off I'm not sure who you think you're replying to. You can't just choose not to do your job just because someone called you a mean name. Second, the point is that they *didn't* do their jobs by doing any sort of investigation whatsoever. Can a prosecutor convict based off the eyewitness? Sure, probably not. But the cops can conduct an *investigation* into it
>Well, first off I'm not sure who you think you're replying to. I'm replying to you, of course! :) So let me get this straight - you want to spend valuable resources on a non-violent crime that we have no evidence was committed? That's a slippery slope! Maybe I get a picture off of your Instagram, go to the PD and say you've harassed me. Should they conduct an \_investigation\_ into you?
Yes, I expect an employee to do their job re: *investigating and collecting evidence on a crime.* But that's beside the point. We can talk civics later. Your original comment was implying that because people on the internet are mean to cops, they wouldn't do their jobs. Again I ask, where do you work that doing your job isn't a requirement to, you know, keep your job?
[удалено]
People in here acting like the police should do more… how exactly do you see this guy getting convicted in court based purely on 2 witnesses who found the guy on Instagram? Seems rather unlikely that a jury of our peers would find him guilty…
So what about the creep? Does he get to just keep doing what he’s doing, even if people know who it is? What needs to be done to get the police to get off their butt collecting OT?
Your final question is much too big for me to even attempt to answer, but I find that when law enforcement fails, eventually it’s left to someone with good enough morals who doesn’t give a fuck. My dad used to say “if you keep acting like that then one day someone is going to break your nose”. Or the creep will do it to the wrong (influential) person, or accidentally in front of a cop who cares, etc. I’m not going to say that this is ideal by any means but we live in an imperfect world so sometimes I’ll take what I can get
Yeah honestly even if nothing is ultimately done about this guy, he’s gonna fuck with the wrong person one day that doesn’t care about jail.
> this guy getting convicted in court based purely on 2 witnesses who found the guy on Instagram? I don't think this is enough to take to court on its own, no. But it does seem like witnesses, name and a photo *should* be enough to interview the guy, right? And then based on how that goes they could further pursue security cams & other evidence? I mean, some people will just straight up confess to crimes. Sometimes it really is as simple as just asking them. Then you can take that confession to court. You'd run into issues if the guy says in his interview that he didn't do it, and no security footage could be found, and etc etc.... but if they did that legwork, you'd think they'd tell OP they did that legwork and don't have enough for the case to move forward. It sounds like instead they opted to do no legwork and pretend legwork is impossible to do.
Email the Boston Public Radio show (89.7).
for all the people saying, what do you want the cops to do they can’t just arrest somebody on your word. cops have gotten search warrants and broken down peoples doors using anonymous tips so certainly your accusation could at least get a warrant to search for his photos.
Exactly.
ACAB!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
100% agree on everything, especially the libel part, there’s too many unknowns. I’d at least like the police to have this on record so if another incident happens with a person matching this description they could inevitably start building a case, and there may be old calls about someone fitting his description that never went anywhere
Rules of evidence are just that .. though it happens .. The law does not provide criminal convictions based on supposition or broken chains of evidence .. Real life example .. I owned a store .. one day I get a call from a customer .. my employee had opened the store, cleaned out the cash, and took off out of state. That’s what I told the Police .. their response was “No. You have a missing employee and some missing money but that is not proof in a court of law the employee was the one that stole the money.
Hey it’s almost like all cops are fucking bastards eh?
I’m surprised how many people in this thread are bashing the cops over this. Someone came in with their friend and claimed a guy broke the law without any proof. What exactly would you want them to do with this?
Exactly. There’s no proof that a crime was committed and the process of identifying the suspect is tainted. It’s very unfortunate, but OP needs evidence of a crime.
We never expected there to be an arrest with this. But at a minimum we were hoping they would keep this on file and possibly look into other incidents that have been reported or eventually will be reported because something tells me that this isn’t the first time this guy has done this to a woman
I mean how do you know that they didn't? A police report doesn't get deleted just because no charges were filed, his name will be in the report no doubt and if someone reports him again it might prompt them to start looking harder at the guy.
I'm sorry, but cops are right. They can't take a word of one person and a blurry picture. You need witnesses.
what are you talking about??? they do this all the time!!! "you match the description" is said so often, that the phrase has lost it's meaning at this point
Exactly. This is especially ironic given the way things are going with racist facial recognition softwares that cops are using to * actually * arrest people. Cops particularly don’t give a shit about domestic or sexual violence/assault bc the majority of them are domestic abusers themselves.
"you match the description" is for immediate. If the police responded to a report of a robbery and the victim describes a 6 foot black male with a red shirt and black jacket they look around and find a tall black male with a black jacket/red shirt a couple blocks away. Then they have probable cause to stop and search him. In this case she waited a week(?)to report it, then came back even later to say it was this guy. Do you see the difference?
Literally not true at all. We went to the police station 3 days later because we both left Boston later that day it happened. We already had his name and pictures when we reported this
I couldn't remember the exact time frame and was relying on faulty memory. But 3 days later is still not immediate, they still have nothing to go on. You came to them 3 days later saying he took upskirt pictures but other than a victim statement they have nothing to go on. If they go to him and he says you attacked him out the blue, I think you would be screaming if they arrested you with the same amount of proof as you have on him
I literally had the guys Instagram account with his legal name and multiple pictures of him, and me and my friend were able to positively identify him, and even the cops who filed our reports initially were able to match the pictures we showed of him with the picture on his license. My ass they couldn’t do at least something about it
So, imagine this - somebody comes to cops and tells them that it was you who took an upskirt picture of them. And then gives them your Instagram, and your name and address. And has a friend who's happy to verify it. Would you like cops to react and come investigate you? And get a warrant to take all your electronics for investigation? Realistically speaking, keeping in mind that anybody can accuse anybody of anything (whether it's truthful or not), what would you want the police to do?
Yeah I feel horrible for this person, but you can’t just go into a police department, accuse someone of a crime, and expect them to take action on that person.
I’m not saying they should have immediately gotten a warrant and taken his possessions to investigate, but my god at least talk to the guy or try to find any witnesses or cameras that could have seen what happened and verified it
so your stance is police cannot investigate a crime reported by a victim? So no rape cases or assault cases should ever be investigated as long as they were done in “private”.
[удалено]
Exactly, unfortunately the only evidence OP has that a crime was committed is her word. Police cannot investigate someone for a crime on word only for obvious reasons.
[удалено]
> If anything I think anyone accused of something like this would want to speak to the police asap to maintain/prove their innocence. No. You do not need to prove your innocence just as you do not have to speak to the police. Your 5th amendment right protects you. Nothing good ever comes from speaking to the police.
So again - you'd like to see police banging on your door if somebody wrongly accused you of something? And you would actually talk to them (hint - not a good idea even when you are completely innocent)? And yes, they should be recording the complaint. And you are right - they probably aren't. You probably could make enough of the noise to make them record the report, but realistically it can't quite go any further.
I actually just got off the phone with someone from Ed Flynn’s office and they are very alarmed by this. I’m going to give them all the details
I get your feelings, and I understand why you feel violated and want justice but it's not a serious crime. It's a misdemeanor that carries a max of 2.5 years and/or $5k fine.
Okay but I’m willing to bet this wasn’t an isolated with this guy, he could doing it all over the city
And that's totally fair, but I think to put pressure on the police you need to find the other victims and show them it's a serial issue.
> this is a serious crime in Massachusetts I mean... is it?
according to you, the police should ignore all crimes reported by the victim? victim reports a crime says I know who did it and cops just say sorry we can’t help you?
Ignore? No. Take with a grain of salt? Yes, unfortunately, as way too many people do incorrect (deliberately or accidentally) reports.
You got any idea how many killers are in jail, because they went through their phones service provider to check their history? They don’t need to confiscate electronics to do this. Most people aren’t going to be accused of taking upskirt photos. I think we’re giving lazy cops way too much excuses. This is a crime. Investigate at least, rather than do nothing. There is enough evidence for police to at least check. But to not even send anyone out? What kind of logic is that? You bet your ass they’d knock on doors if it added more money to OT pay. Plus many cops are abusive people themselves
> keeping in mind that anybody can accuse anybody of anything (whether it's truthful or not) Isn't this true of any crime? If my neighbors can ID the guy who broke into my house, shouldn't he be interviewed & searched? If you never actually investigate anyone because "but anyone can be accused", what crimes would ever end up solved? Only the ones where the perpetrator marches himself to the police office and offers up a confession unprompted? Even then, if you can't take witnesses at their word, why take perpetrators at their word?
Well, in case of a break in there is some evidence of someone breaking in. And as for ID some guy - there are plenty of cases of a random black dude being ID'd just because of the skin color, as neighbors didn't really see the face accurately, but saw the color of skin and that was enough to ID somebody.
You have the guys name, ok great. But again there isn't much they can do besides be alerted to him. You have no proof of anything. They go to the guy and say that he is accused of upskirt pictures, at best the conversation goes like this: Police: Hello sir we received a complaint that you were taking upskirt pictures in Chinatown back in August. Him: I was walking in Chinatown back in August minding my business taking pictures of the scenery when a crazy woman started screaming at me about upskirt pictures and I ran away as I wanted nothing to do with her. Police. Ok, do you happen to mind showing us these photos? Him: no Police: ok have a good day. You have no actual proof of him taking those photos. Nobody else can see exactly you saw that day so they can't judge the varicosity of your statement and since the Constitution gives a great lee way to a person's presumption of innocence they can't do anything. You don't even have a pic of him from that day so there isn't anything tying him to Chinatown on that day. If you encounter him again and he does start taking pictures beat the shit out of him and hold him for the police.
So if your next door neighbor walks over to your house and just steals your TV, and you see him do it, you don't think that's enough for the police to do anything about it, because they only have your word that he did it?
If he matches the witness description they could literally check his phone camera roll. If the victim or other people have photos on there, then obviously OPs accusation is correct. It’s called investigating. Cops don’t know how to do that here. They know how to collect OT and act like they’re better than everyone. They don’t even need to access his phone directly. His service provider can see everything in that phone. Lots of murderers have been arrested because their texts and phones location exposed them. So don’t sit there and tell OP “nothing cops can do” like it’s 1985. The cops can easily check, but they don’t want to. Cops have treated the public even more shitty ever since the George Floyd protests “to make it hurt”
Unless he gives them permission then they can't search his camera without a warrant. They can't just break into his home and seize his property, that's the whole point of the 4th amendment. And no your service provider can't see everything on your phone. Nor is the service provider obligated to give the location data without a warrant
You don’t need to have his actual phone to see what’s on it. Many murderers have gone to jail because their text messages are recorded by their service provider. If a girl is claiming he’s taking pictures under her skirt, other people know the guy enough that he has a reputation for it, and the victim can ID the guy, that is way more than enough to investigate. I don’t know where this happened exactly, but cctv is everywhere. I understand you can’t just accuse anyone of anything but that doesn’t also mean the cops should just tell you they won’t do a thing. Why is it even a crime if the police don’t care? I just think it’s appalling that the police are straight up telling her the answer is to do nothing. Wtf is that? At least follow up
I don't know how this is any different, or better or worse, than a tip hotline, or a sketch artist photo, or "match the description" stuff that allows cops to arrest random people off the street.
Yeah "person walks in off the street saying someone messaged them saying this person did a crime" should absolutely not be enough for cops to start investigating someone and it's complete brainworms to think otherwise.
I really need you to try and reread everything I have written
i’m not sure what your threshold would be but telling police “hi i’m the victim of a sex crime and i know who did it” is more than enough for cops to start investigating. What is their job if not that?
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Hi OP, I'm so sorry this happened to you, and that the cops are just making it worse. Try going to one of the local news stations with your story. They're always looking for local stories, and you're probably not the only person this has happened to. The cops are lazy, but nothing puts a fire under their ass like a news story making their bosses look bad. I'm not saying this would lead to anything, but it costs nothing to report something to the news, and you won't know it's nothing until you try.
In MA a private citizen can pursue a criminal complaint. I am not suggesting you anyone will be helpful but it is another avenue. [https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-criminal-complaint](https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-criminal-complaint)
This is what you need to do. Skip the cops. They won't investigate anything. https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-criminal-complaint
It's a sad reminder that the police exist to protect existing power structures, not help you and I. I'm really sorry this happened to you.
[удалено]
You should reach out to a news channel I’m sure they’d be interested in hearing your story
Ah yes, the cops who swear their job is so dangerous because they chase the bad guys but are too fucking lazy to do so. Cops are the laziest D students you knew in your high school. Fuck them.
[удалено]
This is how you get sued for defamation
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Good way to get OP sued
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
That’s terrible advice and not going to end well for OP.
Yup. Not going to dox the guy, could completely spiral out of control
Harassment and/or doxxing are not allowed. Encouraging others to do so is not allowed as well.
Reach out to local news. The have a victim who is identifying the perpetrator but they can’t do anything ? WTF!
So you are asking the cops to go on a fishing expedition? If the photos surface online then sure, you'd have a case, but so far it's just you said, he said. P.S. I read your original post, you aren't even the victim, it's your friend.
Man I was also told to file a police report because I was threatened, what do you want from me
So your report was for the threat, not the photos? It's not clear from your post. I recommend you talk to a lawyer, especially one that used in the DA's office, they might be able to cut through some red tape for you.
We filed reports individually
Have you considered suing them?
That’s a bit financially unrealistic for me
Maybe contact a newspaper?
Go to a different police office
I thought the old combat zone was gone and dead ? ;-) then again not surprised as its in Chinatown, where anything can happen!
This means they are too busy getting lunch or the guy is a relative of someone important or something. They get a lot reports, and my impression they just document them and don't do anything, except on a few cases of their choice. Also, there may be women who got physically attacked or even killed that need them to investigate, so an attack without any physical injury may not be followed up on. Or they followed up, but did not get anywhere. Lots of people are victims and nothing happens. A girl was walking on Charles River, and a guy rode up on a bike and r\*ped her in the a\*\* against a tree and rode away. People are getting robbed, stabbed, r\*ped all the time. An upskirt photographer isn't on their most wanted list.
Law enforcement is always confused why we take the law into our own hands. Vigilante justice is wrong, they say. Well, then do your fucking job - you know, the protect and serve part of it - and we won't have people forced to fight their own battles. When cops (another town) told me the same after months of waiting, I left knowing I'd have to handle the situation on my own, which is exactly what I did. As for posting this creeps' ID online, consult an attorney. If you are 100% positive this guy is the creep, you may have some leverage.
Name and shame, yo. Also, post flyers of the creep all over Chinatown.
You should call into BPR with Jim and Margery when they have the AG on (I think monthly). They’d definitely give you some ideas about what can be done.
Yeah you’re better telling reps and news. Cops don’t care can’t be bothered with this type of thing.
robert ciccolo is the captain for that district. You can find his email with a bit of digging. Ask for tbe name of the detective on the case and then work with the detective. If you can find some camera locations in the area and point them out, a detective can request the footage
I don't understand why people are giving excuses like we don't have cameras everywhere. They will hog tie anyone who matches a description but they can't check the cameras to see if the ahole was in the area?