This isn't exactly crime of the century but it's damn sick, and this pervert should have got a lot more then he did. I mean, secretly filming women? What else does he do, who else does he film? That's really disgustingly twisted, misleading and perverted. Not sure why the police needed to raid his house over it though, that seems a bit OTT!

Sarah, Brighton,

What ridicolous people so lets put all cameramen who films Lindsay Lohans feet or Kylie's. This cannot be count as a crime, he didnt force anyone for anything or didnt film children. So what's wrong with you ppl?

Kennet Bromguard, London, UK

Did he only pick on women in skirts? and was it only lower legs and feet? I dont think so, you men out there would you like your wife, mother or daughter to be filmed like this?

pat, Torquay,

I can see nothing wrong to get excited by womens feet, I do so too..I know that some women enjoy that too. What the guy here did is illegal, it would be illegal if he secretly viewed other parts of a woman. So there isn't much relation with foot fetish and illegality. Ä°f you want to learn more about foot fetish, just search on net...

Michael, istanbul, turkey

Here is a clip including Carie Anne Moss' feet worshipped. A view to foot fetishism for who wonders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilYRRaj4CXM

michael, istanbul, turkey

"No, getting sexual gratification from LOOKING at women's legs is the crime, nevermind the filming."

Wrong, because it is NOT against the law to get sexual gratification from looking at womens legs.

shrine, plymouth,

So a perv can deliberately film children they don't know, up a woman's skirt etc. as long as it's in a public space? The law needs to be changed most definitely!

James, London, UK

How can anyone say this is OK. Is perverse!! The mans sick! He's secretly filming women!! Thats an Invasion of common decency! And god only knows what he was doing with the film! The very thought turns my stomach!

As for the solicitor who defended him saying, he reasised his actions "probably weren't right. " now theres an understatement if ever there was one! And talking of the solicitor, how do these so called educated people defend such men! He obviously new he was guilty and still stood in front of 3 Magistrates and defended him! If its not a crime it certainly should be! The next thing we will hear is it was legal aid!


I hope this mans picture is now being put up in carparks to save other unsuspecting ladies from a similar fate

P Davis, Torquay,

Under British law, if a person is in a public place it is *not* necessary to get their permission to photograph them.

So, because the Police and CPS couldn't find a way to pin any crime on this man (which is *not* "escaping on a technicality", Times leader writer!), they decide to go for the "Sour Grapes" option of slapping him with an ASBO!

Another example of the abuses to which an ASBO can be put.

This is a pathethic waste of a Court's time and Public Money.

Graham Marsden, Portsmouth, UK

It's true that he wasn't hurting anybody. We put up with being constantly filmed in public places by thousands of security cameras anyway. To object to being filmed one further time by a foot fetishist - arguably a less scary individual than an anonymous security worker in a position of power - is just irrational. Why should he even be given an ASBO? Should harmless idiots be punished for other people's irrational fears?

Felix, Nottingham,

This is not a "technicality", he broke no law, and there is no loophole. It does, however ,appear to be a bit of an abuse of an ASBO: or perhaps it's the perfect example of GOOD use of one?

DC Tom Norrish is in no position to define law for the whole of the UK. The police are there to enforce the law, not make new law to fit their own ideas of what is or is not "right" .

If he had filmed womens feet and ankles by setting his camera on the ground, would that be as terrible? If not, why not? If so, why? Personally, I find his actions distasteful rather than dangerous, and wonder why he could not simply have been cautioned against such activity.

As the man was "clearly guilty" of doing something
"abhorrent", then obviously "there should be a law against it.". However, the evil reprobate appears to have been given an sentence of 10 years parole for a non-violent act.

Perhaps this is one of the new "thought crimes" the government seems so partial to

JM, Aylesbury, Bucks

Filming the legs of women is a crime?

No, getting sexual gratification from LOOKING at women's legs is the crime, nevermind the filming.

Go for it Brits. Stiffer upper-lip and all.

george, Meriden, Connecticut

I was recently beaten up and left with a broken shoulder and other bodily injuries. In many areas of this country, certain people feel free to use violence against people at will.
The police spend far too much time targeting soft "crime" such as this nonsense, while violence escalates.
Physical violence against the person is the worst of crimes, whether bombs, knives, guns, fists, etc. are used.
It's about time the police and judicary recognised this and acted accordingly.

harlan Leyside, basildon,

“A lot of police hours have gone into this case."

Why?? It's just some old crank who's potty about feet. He isn't harming anyone however distasteful it might be.

What a waste of valuable time and money.

Pu Li, Guangxi,

"A lot of police hours have gone into this case"
WHY?
A bit odd perhaps but no one was hurt, molested or in danger.
How may burgularies have a lot of police hours invested in them?

Alan, Oxford,

We should really stop pussy footing about punishing people filming innocent victims for their perverted sexual gratification.
Also the magistrate should have put his foot down and handed down the toughest sentences possible. Isn't is ironic that Rowland shot himself in the foot trying to film the same woman twice.

Wing, Poole, UK