Man arrested for taking photos of cheerleaders pt. II

Brad Bohland said:

stevo23 said:

Brad Bohland said:

stevo23 said:

Brad Bohland said:

stevo23 said:

Brad Bohland said:

Was the guy a pervert? Did he do something wrong? It's a pointless discussion.

Click to expand...

But it's the point of this discussion. If you want to come into the discussion and be flippant and cynical, that's up to you.

Click to expand...

I was trying to be constructive. I guess what's cynical and what's constructive is in the eye of the pervert.

Brad Bohland said:

He was arrested and charged because he was caught taking inappropriate photos of little girls - 14 and under.

Click to expand...

One guy's opinion.

Click to expand...

Did you read the article?

Click to expand...

The guy was arrested, not tried and convicted.

Click to expand...

True.

Brad Bohland said:

When he is tried

Click to expand...

IF he is tried. Charges might be dropped. It all depends on what is beneath the surface.

Brad Bohland said:

and if he is convicted, it will still be one guy's opinion.

Click to expand...

It will be the opinion of twelve at least. Right?

Click to expand...

You mean like in O.J.'s trial?

Click to expand...

I suppose opinion comes into it depending on which side you land. But it was certainly more than the opinion of one.

Brad Bohland said:

Brad Bohland said:

Ever have to deal with a pervert in your neighborhood and community after he's advanced beyond being "harmless"?

Click to expand...

People should be allowed to have fantasies, that doesn't mean they should be allowed to do it.

Click to expand...

I don't care what he thinks. Unfortunately, this guy is exhibiting a dangerous pattern that we see too often. It could be nothing, but statistically, it's not looking good.

Go to YouTube and search "cheerleading competition ." You will obtain a long list of videos about the subject, some involving very minor minors or even younger contestants. The vestments are never what one would call, ur, modest. Some were shot at short distances. Some may have been posted by kin of a competitor. But none had the permission of all the competitors, and some were probably done by people with no familial connection whatever. The videos are public. No videos are taken down. Nobody angry. No one gets arrested.

The news article about the man arrested for photographing a competition does not show us samples of his pictures. Perhaps someone present saw what a person who appeared unusual, with unconventional means to take pictures. After all, most of the audience was white and surely used smartphones for stills or video.

Look. An Asian with a DSLR? Psst, psst. Call 911.

We don't know the details of what flashes through peoples' minds. However, it would be impossible to photograph a CL competition and not get many "suggestive" shots. That would not even be inadvertent. CL involves athletic skill and grace, but the costumes are inherently immodest and prone to reveal. CL involves all sort of touching and tugging near private parts. If parents are proud to have their daughters exposed thus in front of thousands of strangers in a sports venue, often on commercial broadcast TV cameras with long lenses, why all the venom over one poor wretch? The accuser who boasted his military background picked a soft target indeed. The new US CIC has also endorsed profiling, xenophobia, and conspiracy theories. Also like the CIC, the accusers are likely to double down on their version of events. The accused will probably pay only a small fine, or get probation, but his life might be forever ruined.

Yet what makes the accusers better if they (and many strangers) attend hundreds of such events, often posted to YT? Is it somehow chaste because some kids might win trophies or get scholarships to Football U?

REBlue said:

stevo23 said:

This was 10-14 year old girls. Even high school cheerleaders are still dressing rather modest - especially in this part of Tennessee.

Go back and read the original article.

Click to expand...

Not that it particularly matters to the point that I was trying to make, but I believe you are stating something that to my knowledge has not been established.I have read several articles on this incident and not found one that gave the ages of the cheerleaders or described how they were dressed. The only reference to age other than that of the man arrested was to a photo on his Ipad, not his camera, to which he responded that she looked to be 14. If you have an article stating that the cheerleaders were between the ages of 10-14, please provide a link.

Click to expand...

They look to be in that age range to me - especially the man's daughter. And I don't see any of them dressing in any way that could be called anything but modest.

John Koch said:

...We don't know the details of what flashes through peoples' minds. However, it would be impossible to photograph a CL competition and not get many "suggestive" shots. ...

Click to expand...

The issue is not "suggestive shots". The issue is using a telephoto lens to zoom in on a minor's crotch. A camera full of such images in unlikely to be inadvertent.

Michael Fryd said:

The more interesting conversation is that it is possible to take illegal pornographic images of clothed minors at a public event.

Click to expand...

Interesting indeed.

Michael Fryd said:

John Koch said:

...We don't know the details of what flashes through peoples' minds. However, it would be impossible to photograph a CL competition and not get many "suggestive" shots. ...

Click to expand...

The issue is not "suggestive shots". The issue is using a telephoto lens to zoom in on a minor's crotch. A camera full of such images in unlikely to be inadvertent.

Click to expand...

Do you know the accused employed a telephoto lens, how close he got, or what his shots portrayed? Here the insinuations have surpassed what is known. What will be revealed at court? Unless his accusers can present evidence better than "I saw it" testimony, would you render a guilty verdict? What sentence?

There are plenty of YT videos where one sees the under-sides of minors, If the garments were any less covered than here , would that be the photographer's fault?

Good CL sometimes offsets very bad play on field or court, and may be more salubrious then helmet-bashing, but what is the difference between seeing something, perhaps again and again, versus taking a picture?

Michael Fryd said:

John Koch said:

...We don't know the details of what flashes through peoples' minds. However, it would be impossible to photograph a CL competition and not get many "suggestive" shots. ...

Click to expand...

The issue is not "suggestive shots". The issue is using a telephoto lens to zoom in on a minor's crotch. A camera full of such images in unlikely to be inadvertent.

Click to expand...

But the fundamental about our constitution is ... what right doesn't the police had to demand reviewing the guy's camera?

If the guy just picked up the camera and clicked, like hundreds of other audience in the stadium did, what reason, or probable cause that the police would pick him out to search (illegally) his camera? Or is it because he is an Asian and it is all right to pick on someone who is different?

I don't think the charges are going to stand up in the court of law. I hope that the guy find himself a very good lawyer to sue the police, the organization for violation of his civil right and demand millions in damages and punishment.

This just can't be happening with or without Donald Trump.

John Koch said:

Do you know the accused employed a telephoto lens, how close he got, or what his shots portrayed? Here the insinuations have surpassed what is known. What will be revealed at court? Unless his accusers can present evidence better than "I saw it" testimony, would you render a guilty verdict? What sentence?

Click to expand...

From one of the articles: "Officers asked to see his camera and found several photos of cheerleaders at the event, some focused on the girls’ genital areas."

DMKAlex said:

But the fundamental about our constitution is ... what right doesn't the police had to demand reviewing the guy's camera?

Click to expand...

Apparently, the police did not "demand", they asked, and he agreed. You have the right to ask someone to see what's on their camera, and they have the right to agree or not.

From another article: "Police responded to a report of a suspicious person at the event and confronted Fukudome, who gave the officers permission to view photographs on his camera, the warrant states."

Brad Bohland said:

....I end up doing research, looking up articles, searching for photos, and if I find something of value I might share it on the thread....

When I looked for cheerleader photography I was surprised that some of it was as good as the sports pics I have in my favorites folder, so I shared a few for anyone who might be interested.

Click to expand...

What you didn't share were the photographers' credits or at least a reference to the original location. A bit ironic for a photographer to omit that. I would prefer that you give credit where it is due, please.

Michael Fryd said:

REBlue said:

stevo23 said:

This was 10-14 year old girls. Even high school cheerleaders are still dressing rather modest - especially in this part of Tennessee.

Go back and read the original article.

Click to expand...

Not that it particularly matters to the point that I was trying to make, but I believe you are stating something that to my knowledge has not been established. I have read several articles on this incident and not found one that gave the ages of the cheerleaders or described how they were dressed. The only reference to age other than that of the man arrested was to a photo on his Ipad, not his camera, to which he responded that she looked to be 14. If you have an article stating that the cheerleaders were between the ages of 10-14, please provide a link.

Click to expand...

The story refers to the cheerleaders as being "young girls". The video shows images of one of the girls in the competition. To my untrained eye, she appears to be under 15.

Other stories seem to suggest that at least on of the cheerleaders was 14: "Officers asked to see his camera and found several photos of cheerleaders at the event, some focused on the girls’ genital areas. When asked about one photo that looked to be of a girl around 14 years old, police say Fukudome admitted that he knew the girl looked to be that age."

Another story says: The camera held photos of several girls competing in the event, including some shots focused on the girls' genital areas, according to the warrant. Authorities questioned Fukudome specifically about one photo of a girl, approximately 14 years old. "The suspect was asked, 'How old do you think this female in the picture is?' " the warrant states. "He replied, 'About 14.' "

Here's a story that refers to "several teenage girls": A 45-year-old man has been arrested after photographing several teenage girls at a Sevierville cheerleading competition, authorities said.

Given these stories, it appears he was photographing the crotches of "young girls" or "teenage girls", at least one of which he acknowledged to be 14 years old.

Click to expand...

I do not condone what this guy is accused of doing, but I do not know why some people on this forum are going out of their way to distort and make up things to try to make him appear even worse. I think we can all agree that what he is accused of is improper, MAYBE illegal, but lets at least try to stick with the facts. "Young girls" does not mean that they are between the ages of 10 and 14. "Teenage" ranges from 13 to 19. Again, the photo that he was questioned about was not on his camera, it was on an Ipad. It has not been shown to be from the cheerleading competition. All the stories that you mention simply omit the information about the Ipad.

Some of the photographs were focused in on inappropriate areas of the girls' bodies. Kazuhiro also had a photo of a girl on his iPad who was approximately 14 years old.

REBlue said:

REBlue said:

...

Click to expand...

I do not condone what this guy is accused of doing, but I do not know why some people on this forum are going out of their way to distort and make up things to try to make him appear even worse. I think we can all agree that what he is accused of is improper, MAYBE illegal, but lets at least try to stick with the facts. "Young girls" does not mean that they are between the ages of 10 and 14. "Teenage" ranges from 13 to 19. Again, the photo that he was questioned about was not on his camera, it was on an Ipad. It has not been shown to be from the cheerleading competition. All the stories that you mention simply omit the information about the Ipad.

Some of the photographs were focused in on inappropriate areas of the girls' bodies. Kazuhiro also had a photo of a girl on his iPad who was approximately 14 years old.

http://www.local8now.com/content/ne...ille-cheerleading-competition--419189134.html

Click to expand...

You are correct that we don't have all the information.

We do have is a vague description of the facts. However, we also have an additional detail - both the police and the prosecutor felt there was sufficient evidence to charge the guy. That's highly suggestive that those professionals thought there were images that were illegal.

I can't say whether or not the images actually did cross the line. However, given what I have heard, it would not surprise me if they did.

Let's assume that the images were merely creepy, and none of them were close to being illegal. If that was the case, I would be surprised if the police would have arrested the man, and the prosecutor pressed charges.

But I could be wrong. From where we are, it's all just speculation.

Then I take it that you have never heard of charges against defendants being dismissed or of defendants being acquitted at trial. I mean after all, the police made the decision to arrest them, so their actions must fit within the statute that they were charged with violating and the prosecutor filed charges, so they must be guilty. I'm starting to wonder why we bother with courts and trials since the police and the prosecutors seem to be infallible in your view.

Brad Bohland said:

I found all of it on Google Images. Should have said.

Click to expand...

Yes, you should have.

REBlue said:

Then I take it that you have never heard of charges against defendants being dismissed or of defendants being acquitted at trial. I mean after all, the police made the decision to arrest them, so their actions must fit within the statute that they were charged with violating and the prosecutor filed charges, so they must be guilty. I'm starting to wonder why we bother with courts and trials since the police and the prosecutors seem to be infallible in your view.

Click to expand...

It's not that I think the police and prosecutors are infallible. I just think they get it right far more often than they get it wrong.

Not every dropped case is dropped due to innocence. Sometimes it a more mundane reason.

Sometimes charges get dropped for budgetary reasons. There is a limited budget and it sometimes isn't worth the cost involved to pursue a case. A good defense lawyer can make a case very expensive to prosecute. We recently had a local case where the defense attorney was able to delay arraignment for about 7 years. prosecuting a case that old can be expensive. Witnesses have moved away. Investigators have retired. When the case is that old, it requires more preparation. As it turns out, when they finally tried the case there was a mistrial. A decision has to be made as to whether or not to continue. At some point the prosector may want to retire, or key witnesses may die of old age. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the charges get dropped or negotiated away.

But you are correct in that the police don't always get it right. Sometimes they do arrest and charge the wrong guy. That's why we have the courts and trials.

Our courts are part of the checks and balances we put on the police and prosecutors. The courts are there to correct it when the police get it wrong. They serve as strong encouragement for the police and prosectors to try to get it right. If you are a policeman or prosecutor you try to avoid arresting/charging the wrong guy. It's a waste of time and resources to have a trial if the person is likely to be found not-guilty.

Michael Fryd said:

John Koch said:

Do you know the accused employed a telephoto lens, how close he got, or what his shots portrayed? Here the insinuations have surpassed what is known. What will be revealed at court? Unless his accusers can present evidence better than "I saw it" testimony, would you render a guilty verdict? What sentence?

Click to expand...

From one of the articles: "Officers asked to see his camera and found several photos of cheerleaders at the event, some focused on the girls’ genital areas."

Click to expand...

OK. Let the evidence be presented at court. But you seem to judge already. Cops (always photography fans, surely!) convince you outright. Would you vote to hang or electrocute?

Meanwhile, there are plenty of YT videos that feature quite the same things and result in no accusations, arrests, or convictions.

Personally, I'd be much happier if all boys and girls excelled at cheer-leading, rather than bust their brains at football. If they touch each-other during the play, fine. Better that, than zica or old-fashioned shot-gun events.

Maybe the photog is a creep. But, absent firm evidence (and not racist rants), I'd let the wretch walk free with a modest warning: "next time, be white or use a smart phone."

Meanwhile, as pointed out, there are abundant cases of public immodesty, involving minors, that thrive without any denunciation or penalty. Why should it offend anyone at all? If so, society might as well abolish other sports too.

John Koch said:

Michael Fryd said:

John Koch said:

Do you know the accused employed a telephoto lens, how close he got, or what his shots portrayed? Here the insinuations have surpassed what is known. What will be revealed at court? Unless his accusers can present evidence better than "I saw it" testimony, would you render a guilty verdict? What sentence?

Click to expand...

From one of the articles: "Officers asked to see his camera and found several photos of cheerleaders at the event, some focused on the girls’ genital areas."

Click to expand...

OK. Let the evidence be presented at court. But you seem to judge already. Cops (always photography fans, surely!) convince you outright. Would you vote to hang or electrocute?

Click to expand...

I'm not judging. I am suspecting. But I am not on the jury, so my opinion won't affect him either way.

John Koch said:

Meanwhile, there are plenty of YT videos that feature quite the same things and result in no accusations, arrests, or convictions.

Click to expand...

I didn't review the entire video. Does it feature a lot of close up shots where the crotch fills the screen? If not, it may not qualify as "quite the same thing".

John Koch said:

Personally, I'd be much happier if all boys and girls excelled at cheer-leading, rather than bust their brains at football. If they touch each-other during the play, fine. Better that, than zica or old-fashioned shot-gun events.

Maybe the photog is a creep. But, absent firm evidence (and not racist rants), I'd let the wretch walk free with a modest warning: "next time, be white or use a smart phone."

Click to expand...

It's not up to us whether or not he goes free. We don't have the evidence. The court and jury will have a say in that.

However, that doesn't mean we can't have a thought on the matter.

John Koch said:

Meanwhile, as pointed out, there are abundant cases of public immodesty, involving minors, that thrive without any denunciation or penalty. Why should it offend anyone at all? If so, society might as well abolish other sports too.

Click to expand...

From a legal perspective public immodesty is a different issue than child pornography. Whether or not it should be, is a different issue.

Michael Fryd said:

From a legal perspective public immodesty is a different issue than child pornography. Whether or not it should be, is a different issue.

Click to expand...

Hang the guy or not? DJT's base awaits your verdict. The hangman is getting tired and expects his wages. Don't dally. Chop-chop or not?

We really do need to get a few women to join this website.

Michael Fryd said:

REBlue said:

Then I take it that you have never heard of charges against defendants being dismissed or of defendants being acquitted at trial. I mean after all, the police made the decision to arrest them, so their actions must fit within the statute that they were charged with violating and the prosecutor filed charges, so they must be guilty. I'm starting to wonder why we bother with courts and trials since the police and the prosecutors seem to be infallible in your view.

Click to expand...

It's not that I think the police and prosecutors are infallible. I just think they get it right far more often than they get it wrong.

Not every dropped case is dropped due to innocence. Sometimes it a more mundane reason.

Sometimes charges get dropped for budgetary reasons. There is a limited budget and it sometimes isn't worth the cost involved to pursue a case. A good defense lawyer can make a case very expensive to prosecute. We recently had a local case where the defense attorney was able to delay arraignment for about 7 years. prosecuting a case that old can be expensive. Witnesses have moved away. Investigators have retired. When the case is that old, it requires more preparation. As it turns out, when they finally tried the case there was a mistrial. A decision has to be made as to whether or not to continue. At some point the prosector may want to retire, or key witnesses may die of old age. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the charges get dropped or negotiated away.

But you are correct in that the police don't always get it right. Sometimes they do arrest and charge the wrong guy. That's why we have the courts and trials.

Click to expand...

Much, much too late. As I pointed out to you earlier in this thread.

Michael Fryd said:

Our courts are part of the checks and balances we put on the police and prosecutors. The courts are there to correct it when the police get it wrong. They serve as strong encouragement for the police and prosectors to try to get it right. If you are a policeman or prosecutor you try to avoid arresting/charging the wrong guy. It's a waste of time and resources to have a trial if the person is likely to be found not-guilty.

Click to expand...

As for your presumption of his likely guilt, I pointed that out to you too.

Brev00 said:

We really do need to get a few women to join this website.

Click to expand...

Sure: then he would be hung, drawn and quartered here and now, just in case. That's your only possible motivation that I can think of, for making that suggestion.