Teenager attacked by a woman for flying a "drone" over a beach; called a "pervert"

[mistahzig1]

(apologies if already posted)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/11/austin-haughwout-attacked-teen-will-sue-andrea-mears_n_5484324.html?ir=Crime

So basically, a woman attacked a teenaged "drone" geek who was flying a drone over a beach, taking offense of being filmed. She called the cops 3 times and started attacking the teenager. When the cops arrived, she told them that HE attacked HER. The cops were going to arrest the 17 yo but luckily, he had filmed the altercation, thus proving his innocence.


Several subjects of discussion here i think:


1) What are your thoughts on "drones" (sorry it's not the proper term for the device he was using according to ppl into that particular hobby) flying over public places?

My opinion: I saw overeactions typical to these kinds of events, mainly that perverts now have a new "weapon" on their hands to take pictures of women in bikinis, which I find ridiculous. Aside from the obvious concept of "no privacy expectations in a public area in the legal sense", there is also the fact that practically EVERYONE have a phone with a camera built into it, which is WAY more easier to conceal and operate should you ever be inclined to be a creep...
My ONLY concern about such machines flying over public places would be Murphy's law: a malfunction combined with the law of gravity... and my unlucky self underneath.

NOTE: the teenager was filming the LANDSCAPE
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s
(you can barely make out the gender of people underneath)


2) How lucky was he to be filming the incident? The woman lied to the cops about the altercation, saying the teenager was the one who attacked HER. The cops were believing her story until the kid showed the footage to the cops.

My opinion: The obvious one, of course. However, since I do not want this thread to derail into anti-feminism rants, lets not call her type a feminist, ok? She's rather a neo-paternalist, using both sides (equality / protected female status) to her own advantage. Afterall, in any given situation where people's situations are presented with societal loopholes that can give them an advantage in life, of course the lazy elements of the demographic ill use it, no?


3) SHOULD ppl expect privacy in public places?

My opinion: I'm allergic to absolutes when the human race is in an equation, toI cannot say yes/no completely


4) Other issues/questions you guys can think of?

 

[Thaluikhain]

My opinion: I saw overeactions typical to these kinds of events, mainly that perverts now have a new "weapon" on their hands to take pictures of women in bikinis, which I find ridiculous. Aside from the obvious concept of "no privacy expectations in a public area in the legal sense", there is also the fact that practically EVERYONE have a phone with a camera built into it, which is WAY more easier to conceal and operate should you ever be inclined to be a creep...
My ONLY concern about such machines flying over public places would be Murphy's law: a malfunction combined with the law of gravity... and my unlucky self underneath.

Yessssss...but if you were to take your camera out and follow someone round filming them for no adequately explained reason, even in a public place, they aren't likely to think highly of you.

Now, it wouldn't be hard to be trying to film a landscape and be confused with doing this, which could lead to problems.

Personally, I have all sorts of worries about the use of drones, but there's no way of stopping them.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Err last time I've check, a beach is a public place (unless it was a nude beach) and even then she I think she was dressing normally?
Honestly some people can be paranoid nutters at time. Years ago one of my uni project was recording stuff with a camera and I helped my mate with their project which involve filming the food court from above (two floors). At some point some guy up to us if we were filming them which my mate quickly reply no (it was just an overhead shot).

Also to answered the OP question-

1. I'm not too bother about it but I guess I'm more ignorance about it (if it's hidden chance are I'm not aware of it).

2. Very lucky given to the hold she put on him. She could of taken the phone away from him!

3. Haha! No!

4. N/ A other than people can be paranoid sometimes.

 

[Majinash]

there is also the fact that practically EVERYONE have a phone with a camera built into it, which is WAY more easier to conceal and operate should you ever be inclined to be a creep...

I think this is the most important thing to keep in mind. People are getting bent out of shape because the "drone" is new and scary. Some people are just afraid of new things. We all have phones with cameras, which you can turn the flash off, and set to silent so it doesn't even make that fake camera shutter sound.

If that woman was really worried about being filmed she should have attacked every person on that beach who was texting or surfing youtube or skyping or anything that doesn't involve the phone smashed up against their ear.

The drone is just the X-men of cameras. It does the exact same thing as a camera phone, but ignorant people are afraid of it because it looks different and they don't have one.

The woman telling people that HE attacked her I think has less to do with gender issues and more to do with her being an awful person. Depending on how the teenager looked an older man could make the same claim and be believed. People distrust teenagers, it's a sad stigma. But has more to do with a morally bankrupt person trying to take advantage of anything they could, gender age or anything else it wouldn't have mattered.


EDIT: after rematching the video of the assault I wanted to add that for a 17 year old, he handled that situation very well. With the exception of him calling her an "asswipe" (I'll forgive him, seems about right for highschool) He was never aggressive, stated out loud the only reason he was in physical contact with her, and asked for help from those around him. I'd give the guy a pat on the back for being composed in what must have been a very stressful situation. That and he had the forethought to record the whole incident before it went really downhill.

She on the other hand, just seems like an awful person. Sounded whiny to the cops (you don't ever need to tell them to "hurry", ever), resorted to violence, and then talked shit the whole time when it was pretty obvious he wasn't actually trying to fight back.

 

[Happiness Assassin]

I don't understand how someone using a drone makes them a "pervert". I mean, if you looking for voyeuristic kicks, 50 feet in the open air seems like the worst way to go about it.

 

[zxvcasdfqwerzxcv]

That woman should have the full force of the law thrown at her. Not only is she down for assault, but lying the police is a very serious allegation, particularly if she was attempting to falsely accuse the teenager of assault. She should suffer serious consequences as her actions were completely unacceptable.

No one should ever assume privacy in a public place, given today's technology. If you are in public, you are being filmed (think of all the security surveillance around!) and I don't believe it is illegal (as far as I know, in most countries) for anyone to film or photograph someone else in public without their consent. That said, it is impolite, and if asked the polite thing to do would be to stop and if requested, delete the footage. In this case, he wasn't even filming people directly, so his attacker's reaction was completely disproportionate.

 

[Bravo Company]

I don't have any problems with people flying their "drones" (more like improved RC helicopters/planes imo) around at the beach. Especially as high as his was, you can tell he didn't have any intentions on filming people, and the beach wasn't even crowded so it had to be either a beach that nobody went to or during the weekday.

If you want to fly your drone around and film stuff from 50 feet in the air, more power to you, just don't be buzzing peoples heads.

As for the lady, I hope she gets heavily fined and the teen gets to sue her because people need to learn that their actions have consequences and you can't just go around assaulting people because you disagree with them. Especially considering how calm that kid was, he didn't appear to be doing anything to her. Write her off as a pyscobitch I suppose.

I don't understand the "expect privacy in public places" thing. Everybody and their brother has a smartphone that can record without anybody knowing. Plus, you're at the fucking beach in a bikini and you're worried people will see you? Go get a pool with a privacy fence if you're that concerned about privacy.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Well, you of course shouldn't just go and attack people when their behaviour annoys you.

But at the same time, those drones are in a pretty fuzzy legal territory. You have the right to refuse being pictured or filmed. Especially if the footage is released on the internet afterward, you can not normally do that without asking for permission from the filmed people (that rarely happens of course).

 

[fix-the-spade]

Wow, self righteous egomaniac coming in hot!

Whether she goes to jail or not (she probably won't) her life and career prospects are now in the shitter. Any employer that types her name into Google is going to get her lovely mug beating up a teenage kid over an incident that existed only in her mind, not to mention the criminal record. She's also managed to make herself a global hate figure, if only for a few days.

I also wonder what her current employer may do, most contracts allow employers to fire you over criminal convictions, especially ones for violence.

Congratulation Andrea, burger flipping it is!

 

[Majinash]

There's also something called privacy and many people do not like to be filmed by strangers, which is their good right.

Going to disagree with you there. There are plenty of old home movies of me when I was 2-4 years old at the beach. My parents took those movies with an old movie camera, not a phone. Everyone who saw them filming knew that they were filming. There are countless people in the background who we never asked for permission to be in our family movies. Those people were on the beach, with no right to ask my family to not film our movies. If they were behind me when I was building a sandcastle or falling over in the waves, then they were going to get filmed. If my dad wanted to pan over the scene to show how busy the beach was that day, that would be fine too, no permission needed.

If someone had come to attack my mother for filming me on the beach we would all think that person to be insane. My question is: why doesn't everyone think this woman is too?

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I'm of two minds on this.

One is that the woman in question went totally off the reservation of civilized behavior, but I do see her point in a sense. Yes it is a public place but I also feel there should be some regulations on filming in public areas (I think some places actually have regulations stating you need a permit to film). In a diplomatic sense maybe the kid should have decided to say "Ok ma'am I won't film you or in your general vicinity" so as to avoid useless conflict. People do have the right to refuse to be put on film, its not a privacy issue but rather a consent to be filmed issue. I know big studios have to jump through hoops just to film in public and I feel that the low man on the totem should be subject to the same standards.
That being said, the reaction was way over the top and the woman in question should be fined for her irrationality regarding said situation.
Everyone has the right to deny consent to be filmed, even if its in public.
Again, she overreacted to the situation but the kid also should have been more accommodating to the lady's wishes not to be filmed. Catch 22... but the lady was in the wrong in how she handled it.

 

[teamcharlie]

Wow. Don't attack a minor, and really don't lie to the cops about it afterwards. Especially if there's obviously a video camera around. If the teen even was doing something illegal I can't imagine it being much more than a misdemeanor. More likely it was closer to a faux pas, in which case all the woman had to do was politely ask him to stop and he probably would have. If he didn't, she could have then called in the cops and he'd have been the one at fault.

I don't know that the fact that it was a drone changes much. Kids have been annoying people with cameras and model airplanes for decades. Now they can just do both at the same time. Tell them to stop, and they'll basically have to.

 

[mistahzig1]

I know big studios have to jump through hoops just to film in public and I feel that the low man on the totem should be subject to the same standards.

That's because movie studios make money with these shots. I don't think mixing a commercial product with a personal one (intended for personal use too)can be compared here imo

 

[Lightknight]

Women lying to police to get their way? No, that never happens.

It's quite remarkable how quickly a person's life can change drastically when falsely accused when they find themselves outside without their drone.

Wow, she's scratching him and tearing at him. She should absolutely be charged with assaulting a minor. Looks like she was charged and faces up to a year.

What I want to see is false accusations pursued aggressively whenever proven so completely false.

What's funny is that she claims he eventually struck back at her. Which would be self defense by any definition of the word and by no way justifies her assault in any way shape or form. "Yeah, I was punching him but then he hit me! *gasp*"

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I know big studios have to jump through hoops just to film in public and I feel that the low man on the totem should be subject to the same standards.

That's because movie studios make money with these shots. I don't think mixing a commercial product with a personal one (intended for personal use too)can be compared here imo

I understand, but when dealing with personal rights there still should be at least a personal consent thing involved and everyone should have right of refusal to be filmed, even if its not for profit. Equality goes both ways. Again its wrong the way the woman handled it, I don't deny that at all, but she does in my opinion have the right to not want to be filmed.

 

[mistahzig1]

I understand, but when dealing with personal rights there still should be at least a personal consent thing involved and everyone should have right of refusal to be filmed, even if its not for profit. Equality goes both ways. Again its wrong the way the woman handled it, I don't deny that at all, but she does in my opinion have the right to not want to be filmed.

I understand your point, but I cannot see how such a thing could be accomplished, given the fact that practically everyone walks around with a built-in camera on their phones

 

[Carrots_macduff]

hilarious that she has the nerve to call him a pervert while shes tearing his shirt off, grabbing at his chest and sticking her fingers in his mouth

 

[PuppetMaster]

1) Less chance of being maimed than by gas powered flyers, so s'all good

2) Very. 1 man V 1 woman in assault with no credible witnesses is a bad scene. Best case scenario eveyone gets off with a warning, worst case HE'S facing all HER assault charges plus whatever you get for being a creep tagged on

3) Privacy is not a right. In this age of connectivity it's the individual's task to ensure their own privacy. Ironically, by assaulting someone for violating her sence of privacy with grainy, low res pictures she's becoming an international media sensation with complete strangers knowing her name, facebook, the area she lives, mental stability ect. How fitting it would be if for the rest of her life, everyone she meets know's her as "That crazy bird what hits kids then lies to cops that I'm not hiring or associating with"

4) Be excellent to eachother