Federal Video Voyeurism Law - 18 U.S. Code § 1801
While all states and the District of Columbia have laws against video voyeurism, it's crucial to note that it's also a federal offense under Title 18, section 1801 of the U.S. Code. A conviction for this federal crime can result in substantial fines and up to one year of imprisonment, underscoring the seriousness of the offense.
18 U.S. Code 1801 is the federal "video voyeurism" law that criminalizes knowingly and intentionally capturing images of someone's private areas without consent, especially when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
18 U.S.C. 1801 says, "Whoever, in the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, has the intent to capture an image of a private area of someone without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."
Legal Definitions in Section 1801
Someone is considered to have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" if they believe that their private body parts would not be visible or photographed by others in public.
To "capture" an image involves videotaping, photographing, filming, recording by any method, or 'broadcasting," which refers to electronically transmitting a visual image with the purpose of having another person view it.
The phrase "private area of someone" refers to the naked or undergarment-covered genitals, pubic region, buttocks, or female breast of that individual, including any part of the female breast below the top of the areola.
The "federal territories" encompass national parks, public airports, Veterans' Administration facilities, military bases, and federal courtrooms. Our federal criminal defense lawyers will analyze this statute more thoroughly below.
Explaining the Law Against Video Voyeurism
18 U.S.C. 1801 was established through the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004. Congress enacted this law to tackle various privacy concerns caused by emerging technologies, including:
- The widespread use of camera phones and other compact video devices that can record images without the subject's awareness.
- The increasing trend of taking "upskirting" and "downblousing" photos of unsuspecting women and sharing them through text messages or online.
- The fact that, at the time, many states lacked laws specifically prohibiting this behavior.
The federal law against video voyeurism is unambiguous. It's a criminal act to record images of an unsuspecting person who is nude or partially nude without their consent, especially when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
This rule applies regardless of the recording device used, ensuring clarity in understanding the law. This rule applies regardless of whether the images are taken with a camera, phone, or any other recording device.
Specifically, it is a federal offense for anyone to "capture an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly do so when the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy."
Key Highlights on Video Voyeurism
- "Capture" refers to any act of videotaping, taking photographs, filming, recording, or broadcasting (such as transmission).
- The term "Private area of an individual" refers to the "naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual."
- As noted, a "reasonable expectation of privacy" means the victim either believed they were in a place where they could disrobe without their private parts being captured or had a reasonable expectation that their privates would not be visible to the public. The second part of this definition relates to the trends of "upskirting" and "downblousing."
Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction
Video voyeurism is notable among several laws that grant the U.S. expanded "special maritime and territorial jurisdiction," meaning it is a federal crime not only on U.S. soil but also often outside U.S. borders when committed against a U.S. national. This jurisdiction is clearly outlined in 18 U.S.C. 7 and includes the following:
- Any U.S. territory not subject to state jurisdiction, including all U.S. territories and states that lacked video voyeurism laws when this law was enacted.
- Federal property.
- American ships operating in international waters.
- Foreign vessels traveling to and from the United States.
- American aircraft, whether on the ground or in the air outside the U.S..
- Areas beyond any nation's jurisdiction.
What are the Federal Penalties?
If convicted, it is classified as a federal misdemeanor. A conviction can result in up to one year of federal prison time per offense, as well as significant fines. Additionally, a conviction can have long-term consequences, including a criminal record that may affect employment opportunities and personal relationships.
Defenses Against Video Voyeurism Charges
If you face accusations or charges of video voyeurism, it's important to know that defenses may exist. Although the available defenses depend on the details of your case, some common ones are outlined below.
It can be argued that you had the alleged victim's consent. 18 U.S.C. 1801 only penalizes capturing someone's private parts without permission. If the other party was aware and agreed to the act, you are not guilty of a crime.
We might argue that the victim lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy if they were in a location where privacy is not typically expected. For instance, if someone were naked in a public area, they would not reasonably expect privacy, even without explicitly consenting to being filmed or photographed.
It could be argued that you did not mean to capture nudity or invade someone's privacy. For instance, as a photojournalist, if your camera unintentionally recorded someone in a state of undress, there was no intent to commit video voyeurism.
You might have been conducting official law enforcement surveillance or authorized intelligence gathering. U.S.C. 1801 does not cover acts of "lawful law enforcement, correctional, or intelligence activity."
Perhaps the federal prosecutor's case is weak, and we might negotiate a reduced charge or even aim for dismissal if we can convince them that evidence may be insufficient for a conviction. Federal criminal cases differ significantly from state cases, so you will need a defense lawyer experienced in federal laws and procedures.
The Hedding Law Firm, based in Los Angeles County, California, invites you to contact us for an initial case consultation or to fill out our contact form.
