It’s Getting So a Stalker Can’t Have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Anymore
**Written by Doug Powers
Remember Joe McGinniss, Todd and Sarah Palin’s creepy stalker neighbor guy who moved in next door until the end of summer, in order to finish a book he was writing about the Palins?
It seems that McGinniss is distraught at his inclusion in the show “Sarah Palin’s Alaska.”
From Dave Weigel at Slate:
McGinniss’s attorney Dennis Holahan has requested that McGinniss’s image be removed from the show as “he was not aware that any camera crew was in fact videotaping him,” and the description of him in the show was “defamatory.” (McGinniss has repeatedly objected to Palin’s assertion that he could, or even wanted to, spy on her kids from the house — an assertion she made again in the show.)
I understand McGinniss’s objection to being defamed… because if I was working on a book about somebody’s family and I moved in next door to them while I completed the book, I’d expect nothing short of complete acceptance and high praise.
Here’s a portion of the letter to the company producing Palin’s show, under the subject line: “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” // Invasion of Privacy of Joe McGinniss”:
This law firm represents Joe McGinniss. It has come to our attention that the first episode (titled “Mamma Grizzly”) of the above referenced television show, scheduled to air on Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 9:00 PM on TLC, contains unauthorized videotaped images of Mr. McGinniss which were obtained without his knowledge or consent. In addition, you have already placed a video clip containing this image of Mr. McGinniss on your website and it has been picked up and reproduced by the Huffington Post and many other online sites.
Mr. McGinniss was not asked if any production crew could videotape him as he read a book on the secluded deck of the house he was living in at that time. He was not aware that any camera crew was in fact videotaping him. Mr. McGinniss had a reasonable expectation of privacy under those circumstances. The mere taking of the video therefore gives rise to an actionable claim for invasion of his privacy.
The letter goes on… you get the gist.
The Palins were harassing McGinniss to such an extreme degree that Todd and Sarah were forced to erect this fence to prevent themselves from spying on poor Joe:
I’m not a lawyer, but, as for Sarah Palin’s response to McGinniss’s lawyer’s letter, is “the jerk was asking for it” a valid legal defense?
**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPalin officially endorses desperate, clingy Orrin Hatch; time to rally around Dan Liljenquist
May 22, 2012 11:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
84 CommentsNoted MSNBC mocker of Sarah Palin’s intellect doesn’t do so well on Jeopardy
May 15, 2012 10:33 AM by Doug Powers
82 Comments
Another “novelty” swipe at a conservative Tea Party woman
April 22, 2012 10:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
105 Comments
Ann Coulter’s “novelty candidate” swipe at Sarah Palin
April 2, 2012 12:27 PM by Michelle Malkin
356 Comments
New video: ShePAC strikes back at misogynist Bill Maher
March 8, 2012 10:52 PM by Michelle Malkin
103 Comments
More CPAC speeches in 20 words
February 11, 2012 06:53 PM by Michelle Malkin
77 CommentsPalin: If I Lived in South Carolina, I’d Vote for Newt
January 17, 2012 10:28 PM by Doug Powers
127 Comments
Categories: Sarah Palin
Babalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearRedstate
» Kimberlin’s Associates Caught on Tape?
It’s just this kind of reporting that gives stalkers a bad name. How can stalkers be expected to feel good about themselves when they suffer through this kind of targeted persecution?
The jerk was asking for it, big time.
I’ll bet this will metastasize and cost others their privacy too. Like those people who streak naked through the outfield at major league baseball games.
Didn’t the movie crew shoot the footage, not Sarah Palin?
If so, who is actually receiving the legal challenge, Sarah Palin, or the movie crew?
Since when are people able to cry like this when their image was recording while they were in plain view?
What’s is wrong with the Palins?
How dare they not allow a stalker to stalk them, and how dare anyone turn the tables on the stalker?
Shame on them!
or…
Stalker, stalking stalked, stalked instead…
Film at 11:00
Liberals are warping my mind…. I need to take a long break someplace where there are no liberals.
No.
So Chap, what defense does he have? If I were a judge, I would make it aa legal defense and LMAO at the lawyer.
This is the kind of crap that gives lawyers a bad name (as if they NEED help in that department).
P.S. My best friend is a lawyer and I love him. He would find this laughable.
Tough week to be a lib and a stalker.
Maybe I have amazing powers of perception, but if I had a neighbor who had a video crew over, I’d probably notice them – especially out on my “secluded deck”.
In other news – bank robber sues Fed after discovering stolen money losing purchasing power…
He’s a public figure does not have a leg to stand on
Soap,
If McGinniss was doing something illegal to Palin, then Palkn had every right to calm the cops or sue. I am not aware she did.
However, all other issues aside, assuming that McGinnis’s privacy was violated (and using someone’s image for commercial purposes without their consent and where they have an expectation of privacy counts) the “he touched me fiiiiirst” defense only works against your sister in the back seat of a stationwagon.
Actually, I don’t think it flies there either.
Perhaps Sarah should just explain that the video tape was simply “research” for her book about McGinniss. She has just as much a right to write a book about him as he does about her.
This is not correct at all. Whether or not a “public figure” has control over the use of legally obtained images of them does not mean they do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when not in public.
If I were on the jury, I’d buy it.
That would be very “activist” of you.
Bullies always see themselves as victims. No one had a gun at his head when he decided to invade the Palin’s privacy to gather dirt. It’s just karma.
He should consider himself lucky only a camera was pointed at him.
Slimy.
Just blur McGinniss’s face the way they do to protect rape victims on the news. And change any dialogue that refers to him by name to something generic.
The public will never guess that the show was referring to McGinniss until his book comes out. /sarc off
Crapotier – You are like the proverbial turd that won’t flush.
My God, you remind me of the insipid kid in first grade that starts a fight and then goes running to the teacher when the other kid fights back.
I already know what you are going to say. “Nowhere in Proverbs are toilets mentioned. They did not even have running water in those times.”
You are so predictable.
Right on Hawkk!
I’m sure this little piss ant (Chap) was tormented mercilessly when he was younger.
Now he is a POS liar. I can’t stand their entire lot. They live off of our misery.
Good grief, leave it to Chap to defend a professional peeping-tom who got a dose of his own medicine. I’m going to bed.
Well, the jerk went and made himself a public figure. Now he’s paparazzi bait, isn’t he?
{^_-}
Leave Chap alone.
He is the most reasonable lib I have ever read.
That being said. You are wrong. The Constitution NEVER accounted for recordings. The courts made it up. Have a good day buddy.
Did he spy on the family, and stalk them, or did he just live next door? Thats not a crime, or unethical, unless he did something wrong.
What is Sarah Palin supposed to do, refer to Pervert Joe as ‘Mr. X’?
(Personally, I’d go with calling Pervert Joe ‘Deep Throat’ -its more exciting)
What are you doing here? AlohaGuy said that you have your own whine tasting show (or at least should have) where the blowboy use to work. The only addition to that would be if you could please explain the virtues of grey poupon vs. regular yellow mustard to us common folk. And jus’ saying, let’s see what kind of crap McGinniss comes out with about any and all the Palin’s and we’ll watch how quick you come out to defend them.
#27 was for chap.
In case you guys missed it, take another look at comment #19.
jrgdds has offered a solution worthy of King Solomon. He’d let McGinnis ‘out’ himself upon publication of his own book.
Perfect.
The lawyer’s claime that McGinnis’s deck is “secluded” is a lie. It’s clearly visible from the Palin’s yard and provided McGinnis with a vantage point overlooking the Palin’s house and yard, allowing him to observe what they were doing in their own home ie, invade their privacy, until Todd put up a 14′ tall privacy fence.
McGinnis made himself a part of a public figures life for a while thereby making himself a public figure. He doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
McGinnis’ argument is perfect for his intended lefty audience, who have no trouble applying single-sided double standards a la Alinsky (i.e., make your opponent live up to her standards while you freely live down to yours).
Of course, courts in Alaska usually aren’t so corrupt. Usually.
So, Chap,
This guy has every right to be a stalker. He did “invade” their privacy there is little question of that. Now that the shoe is up his arse, he is crying foul. I know you would NEVER agree but, is this not part of what is wrong with our legal system? Some idiot gets his up-n-comin and he takes it to court. There is always a lawyer around to sue someone for something. Maybe the “he touched me fiiiiirst” defense is not viable. Neither should the “she wans’t supposed to fight baaaaaack whaaaaaa” argument. Alas, we do call it the CRIMINAL defense system.
CRIMINAL d
efensejustice system.OOPS.
Not sure it was wrong the first time but, there you go.
Was the video filmed from Pipers bedroom window?
Stalker-boy reaped what he sowed. That’s what this is about. The one who lived to violate the privacy of others had his violated. This may not be the LAW, but it is JUSTICE.
Those streakers are only good for tazer target practice.
More tazers, less naked streakers.
This is close to the same stupid argument libs make against government
SPYvideo cameras in public place. You have absolutely no reasonable expectation of privacy in any public place. As far as the “Secluded” back porch, it is visable from space, from a helicopter or from the lake (If I remember correctly). If they filmed him in the house by moving a curtin so they can see him, that is an invasion of privacy, Filming someone through an open window from the street, not really an invasion of privacy, you might not like it, but if you can see it from public property or from your property, I don’t think you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. I think it is more likely he was on the deck watching the filming at Sarah’s house rather than just reading a book. Ke was there to write a book on Sarah, not stress free relaxation. If you are watching the filming, there is always a chance you will be filmed.If the Judge thinks it is an invasion of his privacy, they should offer to blur him out or cover him with a black box, then put his name in white text. No problem.
The net effect of the contriversy is Sara’s show will get mcuh better ratings because every one will want to see what it is all about. Thaks dude, free advertising is awsome!
There was a case a few years ago where a couple was having sex on the floor in front of a sliding glass door with the curtains open. A neighbor filmed it with his video camera(for the police, of course), and the video ended up on the internet. The couple was charged with indecent exposure among other things, but the person who filmed it was also charged, he was filming on their property and was trespassing. All the kids standing around watching, not charged. I don’t remember the outcome, but no expectation of privacy from neighbors and their guests if your neighbors can see even in your own house.
You’d think this guy was smart enough to realize he may be in the shot and move inside to avoid it. But it would seems to me he stayed just so he could cause more trouble for the Palins.
Guess he got mad when he couldn’t see into Piper’s room anymore and decided to get even.
Palin + paparozzo (singular form) = Palinarozzo.
Dear Ann Landers,
Here in Somerville MA, we and the kids enjoy going out on our back porch buck naked on hot summer days. A lot of neighbors call the police who always inform them that it’s our property so we have ‘an expectation of privacy’ and there’s nothing the police can do about it.
However, there’s this one neighbor next door who always seems to be out on his back porch with a video camera whenever we go outside and that makes us feel a little ‘uncomfortable’. Should we be concerned about that?
Signed,
Drafty
Well, Chap, we don’t really care what your kind calls activist…. or racist, or etc. Your side started this Alinsky type fight, and we plan to finish it.
The biggest lose of privacy came with the passage of the Patriot Act.
Only someone like chap would defend McGinnis in this instance.
I never understand why trolls like Chap come to sites like Michelle Malkin in order to stir up opposition.
Chap, get a girlfriend or go visit you mother. It would be such a better use of your time.
Don’t be ridiculous. I never said anything like that. He has no right to be a stalker and if he engaged in illegal behavior, the Palins should have called the police and/or sued him. As far as I know, they did not.
In ANY case, none of this provides LEGAL justification for invasion of McGinniss’s privacy.
There is a difference between good karma and good law.
Yep!
To be a liberal you gotta believe in double and sometimes even triple standards.
Well, what YOU all call activist is “ignoring the letter of the law and making it up yourself” or something like that, right? Well, that is EXACTLY what jury nullification is, which is EXACTLY Jim C. was claiming he would do as a juror in dismissing McGinnis’s claim of invasion of privacy.
Like I have always contended, “activist” actually only means “ignoring the letter of the law and making it up yourself, unless it works out for me.” Thank you for demonstrating that nicely here.
Yeah, I lost my ‘right’ to keep the foreign telephone number of the terrorist who calls me 10 times a week from being culled by AT&T and red flagged to the CIA.
I’m certain though that you are simply DELIGHTED to have your medical records digitized and sent to Washington DC under Obamacare. There’s no reason to be concerned with that huh?
I would point out the irony of someone who leads his post with a scatological insult based on a wholly unclever wordplay with my screenname accsuing me of being like a kid in first grade, but I suspect it would be lost on you.
In related news, rapist sues victim for catching the clap, burgalar sues victim because the 50″ flat-sceen he stole doesn’t work, and car thief sues victim because the airbags didn’t work in the car he stole.
Joe McGinniss should remember, Todd and Sarah are gun owners. ‘Nuff said.
What’s your point here? How can your regional death panel operate effectively without up to the minute data on you once you become a retired non-producer in the society.
Thye have to be able to do their part to reduce health care, Social Security, and other costs. As soon as your ROI goes negative and you have a health problem they need to know so they can speed your passage to help your children can qualify for the Death Tax.
/sarc
McGinniss should not have his privacy invaded. He should receive a visit from Luca Brasi.
Stalking the Stalker==a new reality show on TV.
Where is that hungry polar bear when you need him-the lazy bum.
I agree that his face should be blurred, and for good measure, place a Mcginnis beer label over the blurry face for a not-so-subtle reference.
GSP
Reminded me of the old Far Side. Two crocodilles laying on their backs on a sand bar with bloated stomachs. In the water is a hat with a piece bit off.
One croc is sayng, “That was great. No horns, no hooves, no fur; just soft and pink!”
Not so hungry now that there’s less ice for the seals to hide under.
Sarah Palin’s “security camera” happened to point in his direction, for his own protection against some “crazy” tea party members.:-)
Well okay then, he probably IS delighted now that you’ve splained it to him because all good liberals want to die young to save the planet anyway.
It’s called Heaven and you have to wait until Jesus comes back to get there.
McGinniss made himself fair game for comment and criticism when he moved in next door to Sarah for the purpose of watching her every move for his book. He made himself a public figure open to scrutiny, whether it be in words, video or photos.
A reasonable expectation of privacy? What exactly are “reasonable” expectations when you stalk the subject of your next book, who happens to be one of the most visible political figures in our nation?
He invited attention, he got attention. If this guy robbed a bank he’d complain when the police took surveillance photos of him outside his home.
I’m sure his book will include every observed detail of Sarah’s life … except for the camera crews wandering her premises, right?
This is like a burglar suing the homeowner after he gets hurt robbing their home. Was the “jerk” asking for it? Hell no! Rather the “slimy parasitic crusty piece of garbage” was asking for it.
What idiots would even do that, unless they wanted to be seen? Seriously. That is just nuts.
Spot on!!
By the way, I am watching Meet the Depressed right now. It is really interesting to see how David Gregory phrases his questions!! He tries to come across as moderate. However, he asks questions like…”Would the republicans cut Social Security for Seniors, considering what a large voting block they represent”? In other words, he links cutting spending with angering voters. I know that the regressive make all their decisions based on how it will affect elections and the votes they need…but just listen closely sometime. So many of their questions and their answers show that they make important decisions that seriouly affect The Country based on how many votes they will get or not get. It boggles the mind. This is their criteria. Get elected. Period.
Gregory has made MTP unwatchable for me. Russert may have been a lefty, but he (IMHO) was fair most of the time with his questions. Gregory is just another snarky lefty elitist hack masquerading as an impartial questioner on another lefty TV show.
She ALWAYS comes out on top.
I heard he even complains about ATM cameras.
McGinnis (who has, in the past, done work I thought was excellent) announced that he was doing a book about Palin and that he was moving in next to her. He thereby made himself a public figure, or possibly more of one since he was already a well known writer.
IANAL but have read that public figures have decreased expectation of privacy compared to other people. Also, expecting privacy from someone you are stalking is quite insane.
His case is thin but may depend on the quality of the judge.
Calling McGinnis a stalker doesn’t make him one. If he has done something illegal, the Palins should have called the police. If his book reveals he’s been spying on the Palins, he will pay a price.
At this point, the only illegal activity that’s been demonstrated has been on the part of TLC, no matter how hard you guys wish that to be false.
Public figures do have less reasonable expectation of privacy as to their public life. This does not give anyone the right to film them in thier backyard, and then use that image for commercial purposes (which use is a separate, but related, issue and also an actionable claim).
Sorry. You may not like McGinniss. But, from what I know of the facts, the law is squarely on his side.
And you may think that he invaded Palin’s privacy. But writing a book about someone is not illegal. Neither is moving in next to them. The local and state police were apparently watching him like a hawk and the Palins never ONCE filed suit or filed charges the police. So what does that say?
Basically all we have is Palin’s word on that matter. On the other hand, Joe seems to have actual, you know…what’s that word? EVIDENCE! And pretty damning evidence at that.
Chap, do you root for Cady’s lawyer in Cape Fear?
Depends on which version.
The ONLY reason that ‘author’ moved in next door was to garner publicity for his book. He thought all publicity would be good publicity. He never considered that he would find himself demonized to the point his book would be worthless.
I bet the publisher that financed this is more ticked off than this stalking author is!
Umm, the book isn’t even published yet. Little premature to call it “worthless.” Wanna take bets it opens up as #1 on the NYT Nonfiction list?
CRIMINAL
justicelegal system.This thread is yet one more example of why calling it a “justice” system is way, way incorrect.
Was McGinnis outside his house?
I’m assuming the film crew didn’t actually go inside his home to illegally capture his image.
If only his privacy had been invaded…
Why don’t movie stars all claim this when a guy with a telescope shoots a picture of them in their walled-in compounds? If you are outside…
Sorry, the guy’s a crybaby.
BTW, If I had moved thousands of miles to live next door to someone to personally scope them out for my book, claiming I didn’t notice a film crew would be (and is) laughable.
AND if using video of someone and making a profit from it is actionable, why isn’t TMZ sued every week?
umm, they do.
Again difference between being in filmed in public and not being in public.
He never said he didn’t notice a film crew. He said he didn’t know HE was being filmed.
As far as I know, there is no bright line rule saying one has an expectation of privacy in one’s backyard. I suspect it is probably facts and circumstances test. Ironically, the fence Todd put up to purportedly protect THEIR privacy actually strengthens McGinniss’s claim as to an expectation of privacy in HIS backyard. I mean, if there was a fence, how did the film crew get footage?
We don’t know enough specifics to really know if the case should be won. The offensiveness of McGinnis’s behavior probably has nothing to do with it.
It is not a joke to say what we have is a legal system, not a system of justice.
It is just as foolish to expect justice from the legal system as it is to expect fairness from life.
My how easily liberal wish to forget. When this first broke, there were several questions about him invading their privacy, but libs seemed not to care at all since they knew he was there to write a hatchet job on them.
The Palins likely knew no matter what they did, the left and the socialist media would have attacked them.
As it is, the Palins put up a fence to keep the pervert from further invading their privacy, which is only one part of what he was doing.
Early stories on him reported he was busy talking to quite a number of people trying to dig up dirt.
I have no sympathy for this sniveling punk, yet the left, many without ever seeing what was filmed, want Palin crucified based on his whining.
He made the choice to move in next door to them with the clear intent to invade their privacy. Not just Sarah or Todd, but anyone living or visiting there.
McGinnis is just looking for publicity for this or whatever his next stalking project is. The
bestworst thing that could happen to his fortunes is the election of Mrs.Palin to high office- he’d get his own primetime show on MSNBC…… and never be seen or heard from again.
Its kind of worth noting here that someone writing a book on say Pelosie or Algore couldn’t afford to rent a place next door and even if they could they would still be to far away to watch the bathroom window or even peek in the back yard…….
Chap, here’s to you:
Enjoy your uninvaded privacy.
McGuinnis should be used as bear bait
Chap….hypothetical question here:
Let’s say that *someone* was on their “secluded back porch” dismembering a corpse and someone (maybe Todd, Sarah or a TLC film crew) saw it and took picts/video of the event.
Would you still be saying that the *someone* had a reasonable expectation of privacy? Or is this “a different situation”?
Personally, Chap, I’m thinking that, since this person is “in plain sight”, he has no expectation of privacy.
Questions? Maybe. But apparently he didn’t ACTUALLY invade her privacy, at least not in any legal sense.
No. They likely knew that if McGinniss didn’t ACTUALLY invade their privacy, they couldn’t sic the cops or lawyers on him.
Huh? Why are you calling him a pervert? Any evidence of ANY “perverted” activity?
WOW. You truly have the proverbial smoking gun here. He, a book writer, was actually INTERVIEWING PEOPLE about his subject! Holy s***! The man is obviously a menace and not fit for civil society!
Except he apparently didn’t. I don’t think you have a firm grasp on what the term means. Let’s go through some things invasion of privacy is NOT.
Your privacy is not invaded if you don’t get to choose who your neighbor is. Your privacy is not invaded if a reporter asks neighbors and acquaintances about you. Your privacy is not invaded just because you don’t like someone. Your privacy is not invaded just because you make cheap, unsubstantiated innuendo about someone being a peeping tom. Your privacy is not invaded just because YOU feel you have to change your behavior based on your own paranoia about your privacy being invaded.
Which is it? Secluded back porch or plain sight? Those terms are contradictory.
And lets make sure we don’t confuse invasion of privacy in the tort sense with expectation of privacy in a 4th Amendment govermnent search sense. They are related, but definitely distinct.
But, from a tort sense, I don’t know of any exception to the law if the invader happens to see a criminal act while invading the criminal’s privacy. It would be dependant on the particular state, but I don’t think such an exception makes sense. The two acts are distinct.
From a 4th Amendment perspective, whether or not the criminal’s privacy was invaded by the state is a paramount question, and definitely affects how such evidence is treated.
If any of the parties were smoking in their own backyard, then they are sooooo in trouble.
I didn’t realize when the show was airing or on what channel. Thanks to Mr. McGinniss’ legal eagle team I know exactly when to tune in!
Paparazzi spelled backward is Izzarapap.
2 can play that game and watch out, the Google streetview car is in the neighborhood.
What goes around comes around.
By raising the profile of the television show, which makes one wonder if Mr. McGinnis knew about the cable show plans, he has given himself what every author wants: exposure.
This will all carry on until or be brought up in earnest upon the book launch.
Expect the paperback edition to cover his trauma in an addendum.
On November 08, 2010 at 06:54 am, Jimmie said:
MIND BLEACH!!!!!
So he was caught in the act of slacking.
Typical liberal. Nothing defamatory about that, it’s well known.
He was supposed to be writing a smear book, not reading others. Maybe he had a bad case of “fence block,” as even the best stalking writers often do, or maybe he was looking for some good old fashioned Biden-like plagiarism material that he could send in to appease his publishers.
Any Alaskan film is going to feature some of their predators- so this all follows the theme very well.
Hope the film crew wins an Oscar!
I would just blur him out and refer to him as “Liberal pedophile stalker“… and leave it to him whether he decides to out himself as the “Liberal pedophile stalker”. It shouldn’t be libel/slander since his name wasn’t mentioned, and his image was blurred out. It’s not invasion of privacy since his image was blurred out.
Mr. McGinniss is loving this! All this free publicity and everyone knowing his name….that’s how books get sold.