Dear WmTrevor,

No there is absolutely no legal remedy afforded my daughter in relation to anyone choosing to take her photograph in a public place, no matter how creepy the circumstance. If the person was to focus on the certain areas the may be a case;

“Visually capturing genital or anal region of another person. Section 41B summary offenses Act 1966 (Vic), where undertaken intentionally and in circumstances in which it would be reasonable for the other person that his or her relevant region not be captured, e.g. “upskirting”;”
http://www.ccp.org.au/docs/Davison-Legal-Manual.pdf

There are civil liabilities that address nuisance but only in a very limited manner;

“Nuisance and privacy. In limited circumstances where a photographer captures images from outside a private property, this might constitute an unreasonable interference with a recognised right in the property. In particular repeated action that by virtue of repetition interferes with the enjoyment may be a nuisance. A right of privacy per se however, does not yet exist in Australia;”

And in my opinion will now likely never exist because our own governments and councils are are stripping away at the expectation of a degree of privacy in a public place at such an alarming rate, cheered on it must be said by certain members of this forum.

So there are neither criminal or civil avenues open to her.

The staff also have no right to curtail his behaviour. Just for a heads up to people who may be travelling to Ballarat by train or bus you may well encounter this individual.

This is what comes of a society that treats calls for a certain level of privacy when in a public place so flippantly.

“Why should you protest unless you have something to hide”.

How much serious crime is there where the thousands public cameras are situated?

Do criminologists agree with the public perception, anxiety whipped up by 'current' affairs shows and their paper tabloid equivalents, that there is a lot of crime and that crime is increasing?

What hard evidence is there that the cameras have actually deterred crime? True, in some cases the grainy CCTV images may have given some vague lead, but it is public cooperation that results in arrests. Do people even bother to pay attention or take care, where they know that CCTV exists?

Are the cameras in lieu of the physical presence of staff, including police of course?

From crime statistics, it is home burglaries that represent most crime apart from drugs and drug involved violence, eg booze related, and few home burglaries are being cleared. It is not in a public place that you at risk at all, but while you are in the kitchen of a day or as a family watching The Box in the evening. Your response should be to quietly leave your house, while praying the offender is of the old fashioned sort and doesn't want to meet you either.

Cameras in public places are a solution to a problem that was invented by the entrepreneurs who sell the technology and the present technology is *bleep* in picture quality. Every local authority has to have them though. The alternative is employing some youth or seniors as tourist ambassadors, or general street carers. What about that option instead? The option offers far more sophisticated technology, multipurpose and proactive as well.

Meanwhile we should be wondering a bit more about the public hysteria and distrust that are being cultivated and taken advantage of by a feckless media and by leaders who should know better.

Adam Bonner from Nowra started this nonsense with compliant solicitors no doubt and probably legal aid. What has he got to hide? My experience with Nowra is that they need CCTV on every street corner in town.

Never fear, Premier Barry O'Farrell has immediately stepped in to provide a legal loophole for the said cameras.

Nothing said about the high incidence of home burglaries and the low clearance rate though.

Nothing said about more police on the beat either.

RObert and others of a like mind, and I understand the reasoning behind those views try this.
On a trip stop at roadside rest areas, just say three, used by trucks, wander the full length and look for first medicine bottles, then oil bottles filled with urine.
See behind many more truck steering wheels than you will like, is a driver under the influence of drugs, not always do they even know what they are taking.
Bikers first got in to drugs via speed, sold to these blokes.
An office desk is unlikely to mow down, even kill others.
But recreational drugs covers a lot.
Who is happy to know that truck or rock bugy is not driven by some one off their face?
Is their right to privacy more important than workmates right to be safe at work?
Now as been said one dropkick/bloke stopped those cameras.
Are his needs more important than the rest of Nowra?
Is it the government/law makers job to look after most? or all?
It can never work if it is all.

My early morning romp, in the news papers not the cold air, has shown another positive for the use of cameras.
Seems school have been caught street fighting under one, and one has been hurt will post the link later having trouble finding it after reading many sites.