Thallman had exposed himself on the roof of a house in Albemarle Street, Piccadilly opposite to a window in a house where females lived. He was indicted for doing this in the ‘sight and view’ of those who lived opposite and of those going along the public highway. His actions could not be seen from the street but only from the windows of neighbouring houses. He was convicted, but argued that the exposure was not visible to anyone passing along the street and therefore was not in a public place.
Held: It was not necessary that the exposure be on a public highway. ‘If it is in a place where a number of the Queen’s subjects can and do see the exposure, that is sufficient’.
Citations:
(1863) 9 Cox CC 388
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258784