The peeping creep

A guy who for three years videotaped his girlfriend's teenage daughter as she showered, undressed and slept may get away with it because, an appeals court ruled this week, Monmouth County prosecutors charged him with the wrong crime. And only one of the judges said he could be tried again for what that judge called "heinous acts.'' The other two didn't express a view on whether a retrial would constitute double jeopardy.

The decision hinged on laws that link the photographs of a child to sexual situations. That wasn't the case here. This guy admits he took the videos. But apparently he only derived pleasure from seeing this girl in the nude. Maybe that's no different than ogling the Playboy centerfold. But there's got to be a law to punish such sick behavior. He may not have caused her to disrobe or physically harmed her, but she is entitled to an expectation of privacy. And what about psychological damage? Whenever she's in the shower, she has to look around for a videocamera.

Then there's this guy's lawyer. Sure, every defendant is entitled to the strongest defense. But how can he look himself in the mirror knowing that his client is such a creep? Then again, it's not against the law to act like a creep. Maybe it should be.