Luminos wrote:

If he was capturing audio, it becomes 17 federal felony charges.

Va and Pa are commonwealth states and have some different laws than most of the 48 states

Luminos wrote:

If he was capturing audio, it becomes 17 federal felony charges.

But none of us know what was recorded.  This is pure specualtion.

Unique Imaging wrote:
What are you talking about? Read the article.. No girls came forward the police found evidence of 17 other girls having this been done to them too.

"While in a changing room inside Faulkner’s home, police said, the women noticed a camera on a tripod with a light on, indicating that it was recording.

The camera was covered with clothes.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room. The officer spoke to Faulkner Saturday and got permission to look inside, but did not find the camera.

Bledsoe said the case was turned over to Detective Wayne Hunnicutt, who interviewed the women on Monday and got a search warrant for the home.

Police searched Faulkner’s home Tuesday and seized numerous items, including pictures of the Spotsylvania woman in the changing room.

Police also seized 10 computer hard drives, a laptop computer, a Nikon camera, various VHS tapes, small video tapes and numerous memory drives.

The items have been turned over to a state police forensics expert for closer examination.

Bledsoe said police are in the process of contacting the women identified so far about what was found.

Anyone who believes they may have also been a victim is asked to call Hunnicutt at 540-654-5753.

According to listings on the Internet, Faulkner has worked as a photographer for more than 30 years and his portfolio lists examples of various types of photography, including nude. 

In addition to Hooters, Faulkner lists Playboy and Maxim among the companies he has done work for."

There is nothing to indicate guilt in any of this you've posted.  The man allegedly may have done something wrong and the police are investigating.  I understand that the police there locally are working on this case.  I understand that they might appreciate the publics help in locating more models who might have been videotaped without their knowledge, but this is not a National issue.  This is localized to your area, so one thread should be enough. 

It seems to me that you have already judged this photographer to be guilty?  Why?

Patrick Walberg wrote:

There is nothing to indicate guilt in any of this you've posted.  The man allegedly may have done something wrong and the police are investigating.  I understand that the police there locally are working on this case.  I understand that they might appreciate the publics help in locating more models who might have been videotaped without their knowledge, but this is not a National issue.  This is localized to your area, so one thread should be enough. 

It seems to me that you have already judged this photographer to be guilty?  Why?

Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

zaxpix wrote:
I was initially responding to a photographer that is based in Fremont Califonia.

Be more specific next time and say, "us" photographers in the Richmond/Fredricksburg area.

Good luck.

Z.

ahh never mind.. still a sad story

C s p i n e wrote:
Oh yes, spread the fear.

Ladies, you run a higher risk of being taped in a public restroom than a photographer's changing room.

  Your source for this "fact"?

Unique Imaging wrote:

Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

Proven???  What has been proven?   He has not been to trial, and not even made a plea yet!   You are prejudging the man.

Mikes Images - Mike #4 wrote:

Generally, in the US, it is not illegal to video tape someone. You can do it in your home, or elsewhere. However, if the person being videotaped has a reasonable expectation of privacy and isn't aware that they are being taped, then, it is generally illegal.

It may vary by state, but generally you can record a voice conversation, if the person doing the recording is a party to that conversation. In other words, if I call you and we have a telephone conversation, either of us could record it.

However, the fellow in the OP seems to have acted illegally. Allegedly.

Tapping laws vary state by state.

I can't say exactly for videotaping, but tapping and recording phone conversations is illegal in some states except for authorities. In the states where it IS legal, either both parties have to consent and be aware, or in others, it can be recorded without the other person's knowledge.

Unique Imaging wrote:
Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

Patrick Walberg wrote:
Proven???  What has been proven?   He has not been to trial, and not even made a plea yet!   You are prejudging the man.

I think the OP believes because the news report states  the police found photos of the model in the dressing room, as well as other females, that is 100% assurance he is guilty.  If you take the word of a reporter, that sounds like it is true. 

However, as we all know reporters have "played loose" with facts before, and some make honest mistakes.  Many things might have happened, and all that is known is a woman claims something.  I am not taking either side, but it might have been the woman gave her permission and later changed her mind.  It could be that all other females gave permission.  Could be the last woman was out to get the photographer. Who knows?    I do know that reporters jump to conclusions very fast.  I have seen that happen locally, and later they had to back off their original report.

If a person could be convicted, or proved guilty by what a reporter says, then a lot of people would be in trouble.

Laura UnBound wrote:
If the police are tracking down supposed 17 other models they found on video tapes and in pictures, I personally think its going to be pretty difficult for him to be proven innocent. From the report it doesnt sound like he MIGHT have 17+girls on videotapes and photographs in his bathroom ...and they MIGHT not be aware they were being recorded. Kind of sounds like he DOES..

Im not one to burn someone at the stake without any investigation, but to pretend theres a possibility that hes 100% innocent in all this and the OP and the model who reported this are just trying to smear his name is just silly.

Perhaps, but just to play the devil's advocate, what about this?

Brief excerpt from article:

While in a changing room inside Faulkner’s home, police said, the women noticed a camera on a tripod with a light on, indicating that it was recording.

The camera was covered with clothes.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room.

If she noticed the camera, why didn't she call police then?  Why wait until after finishing the shoot, and then talk to an officer? 

That alone one might cause some to believe she wasn't extremely concerned about the camera.

....edit... I wonder how the police learned the identities of 17 other women so fast?

Article states:
During a search of his home this week, she said, police found evidence of other women who were apparently filmed without their consent and have identified 17 others so far.

Photography by BE wrote:

Perhaps, but just to play the devil's advocate, what about this?

Brief excerpt from article:

While in a changing room inside Faulkner’s home, police said, the women noticed a camera on a tripod with a light on, indicating that it was recording.

The camera was covered with clothes.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room.

If she noticed the camera, why didn't she call police then?  Why wait until after finishing the shoot, and then talk to an officer? 

That alone one might cause some to believe she wasn't extremely concerned about the camera.

I answered that earlier. Because models are dumb.

If you want to play "what ifs", her reputation was on the line. She could have left the shoot, with or without an explanation, and called the cops. What if the cops didnt do anything about it? What if they did, but were unable to find the camera? Then Craig, having just had a model walk out of his shoot for whatever reason she did or did not give(probably would have been 10x worse if she called him a perv to his face and confronted him on the camera, because that would probably piss him off), could tell all his buddies about how shes a flake, or a bitch, or whatever. Probably start a thread ranting about the model he booked that day just flat out walking out on his shoot in a huff. God models are such divas. It would be all over facebook, OMP, Modelbrigade, iStudio, Twitter, am I forgetting any of the other sites this guy is on?

see? I dont know WHY she didnt stop right then and go to the cops. Could have been any number of reasons. She'd have to literally be pretty stupid if she finished the shoot because she wanted the photos, and then went to the cops. Does she really think when he gets all his shit back hes going to edit the photos of the girl who ratted him out?

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:
I smell a shut down.

Laura UnBound wrote:
========

If you want to play "what ifs", her reputation was on the line. She could have left the shoot, with or without an explanation, and called the cops. ============

  That is the point some are making... What if?  Who knows?  What if she was just out to get him and agreed to the video, then cried "wolf"?

See, all that people are going by is a sketchy report from a reporter.   

We had a situation locally that was similar, and the police would not give out any information because the "investigation was ongoing".  I guess the police in VA, are different.

Photography by BE wrote:

Perhaps, but just to play the devil's advocate, what about this?

Brief excerpt from article:

While in a changing room inside Faulkner’s home, police said, the women noticed a camera on a tripod with a light on, indicating that it was recording.

The camera was covered with clothes.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room.

If she noticed the camera, why didn't she call police then?  Why wait until after finishing the shoot, and then talk to an officer? 

That alone one might cause some to believe she wasn't extremely concerned about the camera.

....edit... I wonder how the police learned the identities of 17 other women so fast?

There are way too many "unknowns" to make judgement based on articles and the best thing to say from the OP's post is that it's nice to be concerned but let's not turn this into a fear mongering situation among the members here.  Asking other models if they've worked with the guy is fine but to presume guilt is stretching it.  I think to rush to judgement on this photographer is equivalent of "white knighting" when the OP is in the same geographic area.  Quite honestly ... let's let the police do their job!   

I'd sure hate to be accused of a crime and have some of those prejudging on this thread on a jury!    Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty" or did modern media do away with it?

Daniel E wrote:

Most everyone is being civil, and no one is yelling or cursing, or name calling    Seems like it is going better than a lot of threads.

Patrick Walberg wrote:
There are way too many "unknowns" to make judgement based on articles=======

This.

Miss Murder Photography wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's not outing if it's in the news. It's out there for anyone to read.

Not true.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=664198

A story about a model who was involved in a hit and run was locked and hidden as outing, even though it was in the news.

Photography by BE wrote:

  That is the point some are making... What if?  Who knows?  What if she was just out to get him and agreed to the video, then cried "wolf"?

See, all that people are going by is a sketchy report from a reporter.   

We had a situation locally that was similar, and the police would not give out any information because the "investigation was ongoing".  I guess the police in VA, are different.

-shrug- call me quick to judge then.

I certainly dont speak for, or know all the models in the MD/VA area, or the ones who travel to it. Of the ones I do know, not many, if any of them would consent to being videoed in the bathroom.

Unique Imaging wrote:

Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

Your grasp of the justice system in this country is horrid. WTF kinda statement is that?

Fredricksburg ain't far from Richmond, all things considered I could think of a number of reasons for your post other than what you are putting forward.

Unique Imaging wrote:
Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

I did - and I don't see where it says it was proven that he did it.



Craig Faulkner, 59, of Fredericksburg is charged with videotaping a person in the nude without consent, a Class 1 misdemeanor. He was arrested Tuesday and released on a $4,000 bond.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fredericksburg Police spokeswoman Natatia Bledsoe said police are investigating other possible violations by Faulkner.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
During a search of his home this week, she said, police found evidence of other women who were apparently filmed without their consent and have identified 17 others so far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The items have been turned over to an FBI forensics expert for closer examination.


I see nowhere that is says it was proven he did it. I believe the proving happens in court - that's the way the legal system works.

While I appreciate your passion about this, you are making statements of guilt that havn't been proven as fact yet.

Honestly, it sounds like you have a bit of an agenda.

Laura UnBound wrote:
I answered that earlier. Because models are dumb.

If you want to play "what ifs", her reputation was on the line. She could have left the shoot, with or without an explanation, and called the cops. What if the cops didnt do anything about it? What if they did, but were unable to find the camera? Then Craig, having just had a model walk out of his shoot for whatever reason she did or did not give(probably would have been 10x worse if she called him a perv to his face and confronted him on the camera, because that would probably piss him off), could tell all his buddies about how shes a flake, or a bitch, or whatever. Probably start a thread ranting about the model he booked that day just flat out walking out on his shoot in a huff. God models are such divas. It would be all over facebook, OMP, Modelbrigade, iStudio, Twitter, am I forgetting any of the other sites this guy is on?

see? I dont know WHY she didnt stop right then and go to the cops. Could have been any number of reasons. She'd have to literally be pretty stupid if she finished the shoot because she wanted the photos, and then went to the cops. Does she really think when he gets all his shit back hes going to edit the photos of the girl who ratted him out?

Some flaws to what you've said;  Well of course all models are not dumb.  The camera was not found in the changing room anyway.  You are stereotyping models as "divas" and I have not worked with any models who actually fits that stereotype.   There are a lot of "what ifs" to this story.  It's not as serious an accusation as saying a photographer touched inappropriately or worse ... molested or raped a model.  So making a scene or calling the cops right then might not be the appropriate thing to do.  It's been reported, so let's let the police do their job!

However just because a model is making an accusation does not mean that she is 100% truthful.  There could be other motives behind her timing and in making this accusation.  The photographer has a right for a trial with a jury of his peers if necessary.  Let's hold off making presumptions until more information is available. 

Back when a former model on Mayhem was arrested for murder, I pleaded with the other members here to hold off on judging her as guilty until it plays out in court.  In any criminal investigation, I'm mostly saying this because there are victims, the accused and their families to consider.

Unique Imaging wrote:

Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

Read my previous posts word for the day... Awareness

While it may seem you are helping or doing a public service you really
aren't.   You are helping spread the fear and distrust models already
have about us.   See they won't think that it was this person but may think
most photographers hide cameras in bathrooms or are spying on them
as they change.

Long after the details of this story are forgotten some models will
only remember the basic story.   We all should be careful and aware
and I guess the police might thank you as well.   I won't and all
those who have to now suffer through another round of mistrusting
models won't either.

Thanks, player!

Greg Kolack wrote:
Not true.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=664198

A story about a model who was involved in a hit and run was locked and hidden as outing, even though it was in the news.

And I was sent to the brig on that one!    It was easy to find on google.

In my case, it was about a former model on here drunk driving and killing an intern to the governors office in a car wreck in Atlanta Georgia.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
While it may seem you are helping or doing a public service you really
aren't.   You are helping spread the fear and distrust models already
have about us.   See they won't think that it was this person but may think
most photographers hide cameras in bathrooms or are spying on them
as they change.

Long after the details of this story are forgotten some models will
only remember the basic story.   We all should be careful and aware
and I guess the police might thank you as well.   I won't and all
those who have to now suffer through another round of mistrusting
models won't either.

Thanks, player!

Correct Tony.

These situations remind me of a small plane crash.  The crash makes headlines, with the notation that the FAA is investigating , but we never learn the outcome of the investigation.

Greg Kolack wrote:
Honestly, it sounds like you have a bit of an agenda.

I smell White Knights a mile away

Photography by BE wrote:

What?  You are bumping a thread that is getting replies every few minutes?

for attention i'm sure, hey look at me i broke the news to save all the damsels

Greg Kolack wrote:
I did - and I don't see where it says it was proven that he did it.



Craig Faulkner, 59, of Fredericksburg is charged with videotaping a person in the nude without consent, a Class 1 misdemeanor. He was arrested Tuesday and released on a $4,000 bond.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fredericksburg Police spokeswoman Natatia Bledsoe said police are investigating other possible violations by Faulkner.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
During a search of his home this week, she said, police found evidence of other women who were apparently filmed without their consent and have identified 17 others so far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The items have been turned over to an FBI forensics expert for closer examination.


I see nowhere that is says it was proven he did it. I believe the proving happens in court - that's the way the legal system works.

While I appreciate your passion about this, you are making statements of guilt that havn't been proven as fact yet.

Honestly, it sounds like you have a bit of an agenda.

So I'm not the only one who is wondering about that?  Thanks Greg! 

As regular participants in the forums, I have to wonder why someone with less than 100 posts would make their first posts and threads about this topic?  I'm not going to accuse or judge as to if the OP has a hidden agenda with posting about another photographer in his area ... but it sure makes me wonder.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room. The officer spoke to Faulkner Saturday and got permission to look inside, but did not find the camera.

If he truly was doing something wrong, it's simply incredible that he did not destroy the evidence, given an advance warning and all.

eos3_300 wrote:

I smell White Knights a mile away

What do white knights smell like?

Artemis Bare wrote:
What do white knights smell like?

Stainless steel armor sprayed with WD-40?


Wait I know. They smell like White Castles, right?

Artemis Bare wrote:
What do white knights smell like?

Cherrystone wrote:
Stainless steel armor sprayed with WD-40?


Wait I know. They smell like White Castles, right?

  In other words ...

Patrick Walberg wrote:

Some flaws to what you've said;  Well of course all models are not dumb.  The camera was not found in the changing room anyway.  You are stereotyping models as "divas" and I have not worked with any models who actually fits that stereotype.   There are a lot of "what ifs" to this story.  It's not as serious an accusation as saying a photographer touched inappropriately or worse ... molested or raped a model.  So making a scene or calling the cops right then might not be the appropriate thing to do.  It's been reported, so let's let the police do their job!

However just because a model is making an accusation does not mean that she is 100% truthful.  There could be other motives behind her timing and in making this accusation.  The photographer has a right for a trial with a jury of his peers if necessary.  Let's hold off making presumptions until more information is available. 

Back when a former model on Mayhem was arrested for murder, I pleaded with the other members here to hold off on judging her as guilty until it plays out in court.  In any criminal investigation, I'm mostly saying this because there are victims, the accused and their families to consider.

Patrick...Hi, Im Laura, Im a model

You clearly didnt pick up on just how firmly my tongue was placed in my cheek when I wrote that models are dumb. I thought perhaps the little winky face would at least HINT at the sarcasm, but apparently not. OF COURSE models arent dumb. Well, not all of them...there are a few...

I also was not stereotyping any models as anything. You again read me wrong. I said that IF the model walked out on the shoot, and the cops were unable to do anything about what she reported, the photographer COULD hurt HER reputation by ranting all over the place about how she completely blew off a shoot. Again, the line "God, models are such divas" was tongue-in-cheek.


A photographer videotaping models, in the bathroom or otherwise, is not as serious as being groped? How so? Id rather have, and would feel less violated, if someone grabbed my ass than if I later found out they videoed me using the bathroom or changing my clothes or even doing my makeup. To me personally, being videoed without knowledge or consent is fucking creepy, whereas someone touching my butt or tit is pervy and gross and unwanted, but more along the lines of annoying, not really fucking creepy.


Am I somehow NOT letting the cops do their job? Hell, Im not even in the same country right now, I dont think Im standing in anyones way. Im also not stopping the photographer from getting his day in court. If hes found innocent and that this model made it all up and those other 17+ models all consented to being photographed and videotaped, hey, I'll feel like a douchebag. I will admit to having been a douchebag.

Marc Rosebeck wrote:
has the OP, ever taken a photo, of a blooper where something was exposed,an image the model never knew about, and maybe kept the file ??

Probably not....he was busy making what's for dinner lists.

After finishing the shoot, the women spoke to a city officer about the camera in the changing room. The officer spoke to Faulkner Saturday and got permission to look inside, but did not find the camera.

thefurman wrote:
If he truly was doing something wrong, it's simply incredible that he did not destroy the evidence, given an advance warning and all.

Article says police officer got permission (bold in quote), I assume from photographer.

Hehehehe... I watch Law and Order.   My first words would not have been, "Please come in Mr,. Policeman". 

They would have been.. "You have a search warrant, right?"

Cherrystone wrote:
Stainless steel armor sprayed with WD-40?


Wait I know. They smell like White Castles, right?

So White knights smell like fast food? I kinda figured thats what they smelled like on the other end of the internet screen.