Massachusetts highest court upholds doctor’s conviction for urinating photo case

0


The state’s highest court has rejected the argument of a doctor at UMass Med School that attempting to sneak photos of a stranger urinating shouldn’t be charged the same way as actually take them.

Former medical school professor Dr Markus Cooper of Grafton was convicted in 2019 of a 2015 incident in which he hit his cell phone over a stall in a women’s toilet school to take pictures of a medical student in the toilet.

Cooper’s case swept to the Supreme Court of Justice, where he argued that because cops never found photos of the woman on his phone, he shouldn’t have been convicted of the crime. to “photograph a naked person. or partially naked.

Basically, he postulated, the most he did was attempt to photograph her, and his legal representation argued that this was not included in the charge. Likewise, there may have been a “misfire,” his lawyer argued, suggesting that even if the phone made a photo-taking noise, it could have hung up and not taken a photo.

The SJC quickly shed these arguments, Associate Judge Gregory Massing writing an opinion upholding the conviction on all counts.

The original case, according to Massing, began with a medical student “hovering over a toilet urinating” in the Albert Sherman Center at the Worcester Medical School campus – named after the legendary region politician from Boston – when “she looked up and saw a cell phone camera” looking in the stall “and” a knuckle “in one hand.”

“She then” heard an indistinguishable sound. It could have been a camera, click “”, according to the summary. The woman screamed and heard someone come out of the bathroom.

She followed him, found Cooper and confronted him, to which he “replied that he had been on his cell phone and had gone to the wrong bathroom.” He also claimed: “I did not take any photos of you.”

After a brief confrontation, he fled. About 13 minutes later, he showed up at the police station to make a statement and handed over his phone. The cops then did not find any photos of the woman on it.

Cooper had also argued that he should not be convicted of “disorderly conduct” because he had done nothing to justify the charge. But judges said “voyeurs” like him have a long history of being charged with this crime and successfully convicted.

He added that the prosecution shouldn’t have suggested that Cooper could have simply deleted photos, but Massing wrote: Justice. “


Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.