Cameras Catching Employees Having Sex Removed

JH
John Honovich
•May 24, 2013
IPVM

I have never heard anything like this before, but there's a report that a law firm actually removed their surveillance cameras because of liability fear. What liability? Well:

"A partner at a big law firm came up afterward to say that his firm had taken out the security cameras in its stairwells. 'We picked up so much sexual activity on the cameras, after midnight, that it was a liability to have the videotape in our possession,' he explained."

Has anyone heard of any other cases like this? Maybe this a law firm specific issue where associates are forced to work 100+ hour weeks, etc.

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
•May 24, 2013

Doesn't make sense to me. But we recently has a request from our gentlemen's club client to reduce their retention from 30 days to 1. Apparently they didn't didn't want to deal with supeonas for video from soon to be ex-wives and such wanting videos of their spouses frequenting the club.

JH
John Honovich
•May 24, 2013
IPVM

Interesting example, thanks!

Avatar
Brian Rhodes
•May 24, 2013
IPVMU Certified

Shouldn't they be more worried about employees having sex with each other? Dealing with harrassment suits and jilted lovers are bad for any enterprise. Ironically, even law firms.

JH
John Honovich
•May 24, 2013
IPVM

I think this is a 'see no evil, hear no evil' type approach. It might be better for them to be blind to it. I don't know.

JB
Jeremy Binder
•May 24, 2013
Thiel Strategic Communications

Attorneys (Divorce, etc.) and subpoenas are a real factor in determining retention times for public video surveillance by law enforcement, but I never heard of this issue with indoor cameras in a private industry.

Law enforcement agencies do not the burden of administrative cost to respond to subpoenas.

It is no surprise in our current cultural climate where whistleblowers are regularly penalized.

JG
John Grocke
•May 29, 2013

Unless they were covert cameras, the participants had to know the cameras were in the stairwells... Exhibitionists? ;-)

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
•May 29, 2013

"Dealing with harrassment suits and jilted lovers are bad for any enterprise. Ironically, even law firms."

I've known a few people who worked as staff at law firms. You would not believe the sexual shenanigans that go on there. Affairs, druken office parties, partners placing bets on whose gonna nail the next office girl....

MI
Matt Ion
•May 30, 2013
In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

"I've known a few people who worked as staff at law firms. You would not believe the sexual shenanigans that go on there. Affairs, druken office parties, partners placing bets on whose gonna nail the next office girl...."

So you're saying all those lawyer shows on TV are actually "reality" shows?? Oh Arnie Becker, wherefor art thou?

As for retention times, we were actually requested by one retail customer to cut his retention from the corporate-mandated 30 day minimum to 10 days... not sure why, I think it was a similar idea - he didn't want to be bothered dealing with older incidents when he could simply tell them the video was gone. Worked great until a new retailer took over and wondered why she wasn't getting the required 30 days...

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions