Working as a nanny inside someone’s home doesn’t mean they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled in a case over whether surreptitiously taken footage from a so-called “nanny cam” can be admitted at trial in a child abuse case.

The high court ruled 5-2 that footage from a camera that a homeowner had hidden in his children’s sleeping area, which allegedly captured video and audio of the defendant, Beth Ann Mason, striking one of the children, should be admissible in the criminal proceedings. The decision overruled a holding by the Superior Court, which had barred the audio from being used at trial after determining Mason had a justifiable expectation of privacy while in the bedroom.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]