The similarity is that in any bathroom, you have an expectation of privacy.
My gut feeling is that there is more to this story than what we are hearing from the father. Does he have other cameras? Why, if he only has one, did he choose the bathroom? The bathroom is probably the room where the child spends the least amount of time per day, so his chances to catch the abuse there would be smallest.
Other questions that arise: When did he install the camera? Did he do it when he lived there as well? If so, was the recording device in the house where the wife could find it? Did he break into the house after he vacated residence, and install it? Did he put it in the day before he left? When he lived there, did he have a broadband connection to send the footage offsite for storage? How long after moving out did it take him to get the needed footage? Digital Video Recorders can save data for X number of days, then record over from the beginning, unless there is specific footage that he is archiving. I wonder if there is other footage that he saved on the hard drive that would be incriminating to him if he were to use it(wife showering, for example)
We are supposed to believe that the mother and father are having difficulties. The mother almost always takes the child into a particular bathroom to abuse him(why else would the camera be in THAT bathroom) . The father somehow finds this out. Before moving out, he installs a camera in that bathroom, hooks it into his home computer network, then moves out, and logs into that camera and records video 24 hours a day. One day, he happens to record her abusing her son.
Isn’t it more likely this guy was just wanting to film his ex naked in the shower and happened to catch the abuse?
I just cannot wrap my head around any reason that anyone would ever want to put a camera in a bathroom (except for the peeping Tom factor).
Unfortunately, you’re right. It’s the only variable I can put into this equation to get it to balance.
Who else BUT a nutjob would watch his wife continually abuse their child both in person and on camera and not do anything about it? My gut feel is that he was a co-abuser who’s trying to get his version of the story out to the family first to poison the well before his ex-wife starts accusing him.
The location of the camera makes sense if the bathroom was their abuse spot (or, as has been suggested, if he was trying to voyeur his ex - also illegal.) If prior witnessed abuse had happened only at the cribside, it makes no sense at all to put a camera in a bathroom.
And this may be why his lawyer told him not to use the tapes. It may have nothing at all to do with legality (or it may), but he may be seeing ahead three steps and seeing how quickly a judge or jury will find holes in this guy’s story, just like it’s taken us less than 50 posts to do.
So the friend of a cousin’s friend or whatever doesn’t have the balls. Sorry, but it falls to you. If this story is true, and no one else will raise a finger for the child, it falls to you to tell the police what little you know.
I can’t believe this is even up for discussion like it was some hypothetical situation.
(bolding mine) I think this is the key to your problem. The story doesn’t make sense the way you’re presenting it. While it’s not impossible, it’s very improbable, but if you truly believe that this child may be suffering abuse, no matter by whom, then at least report what you know to your local CPS.
There are definite gaps in the father’s story but assuming that he is on the level:
If there is evidence of child-abuse why does he not rescue his son? Even if the mother sends the police after him allegations of abuse would have to be investigated. At worst the child would be placed in foster care or with a grandparent for a short period while the allegations were investigated. If the parents were living together until now then it’s doubtful that custody has been decided - presumably this means that both parents have equal custody rights in this part of the world? There is nothing to stop the father taking the child out of danger.
The couple are ‘going through’ a divorce? And the house is under the father’s name? So why doesn’t he just move back in to protect his child? I would very much doubt there would be anything the mother could do to prevent him living in his own property if no court decision has been made. (And if the legal issues re videoing concern his ‘owning’ as opposed to ‘living in’ the house then moving in means that any subsequent abuse filmed would not be problematic).
If this guy is truly concerned with his son he’d do more than discuss it with his cousin. He really needs to do something positive here or leave himself open to suspicion.
I’m closing this one as there really is no further General Question to be answered. If the person doesn’t want to take the advice of his lawyer, then so be it. Legal advice from a message board, especially in a case such as this with second/third-hand info just doesn’t cut it.