Fayette County Prosecutor Faces Civil Lawsuit for Voyeurism

News Summary

An assistant prosecutor in Fayette County is facing a civil lawsuit after allegations of voyeurism during a woman’s spray tan. Lexington police found no probable cause for criminal charges. The lawsuit claims negligence and violations of privacy rights as the incident raises complex legal questions about privacy expectations in public and private spaces.

Lexington, Kentucky – An assistant prosecutor from Fayette County is facing a civil lawsuit after being accused of voyeurism concerning an incident that allegedly occurred while a woman was receiving a spray tan. An investigation by Lexington police concluded there was no probable cause to file charges against the accused individual, whose identity remains unknown.

The alleged incident took place at an Airbnb located in downtown Lexington, where the woman reported that an employee of the Fayette County Attorney’s office recorded her while she was nude. Following the complaint, officials from the Fayette County Attorney’s office were notified, and a police report was filed last year by the accuser.

The investigation ran into a significant hurdle when detectives were unable to establish that there was a “reasonable expectation of privacy” at the location, which is crucial to proving a voyeurism charge under Kentucky law. As a result, no charges were brought against the assistant prosecutor.

The accuser has since filed a civil lawsuit against Fayette County Attorney Angela Evans and the unidentified male prosecutor. In her suit, she claims several offenses including negligence, negligent hiring, voyeurism, and distribution of sexually explicit images. The lawsuit is currently in the legal process, with a hearing date yet to be scheduled.

Detectives interviewed the accuser, the spray tan technician, and four prosecutors from the county attorney’s office as part of their investigation. Witness accounts varied, with some stating they saw a woman waving across the street, but they could not confirm her state of dress. One male attorney observed the woman from a distance but was unable to make a definitive determination regarding her clothing.

However, the spray tan technician provided more detailed testimony, confirming that the client was indeed naked and had her back turned when she noticed someone filming. Both the technician and the client reported seeing a man wearing a bright white shirt holding a phone at waist level during the incident. The technician took actions to conceal the client and instructed nearby attorneys to avert their gaze.

In Kentucky, voyeurism is classified as a Class A misdemeanor, applicable when individuals are recorded without their consent in places where they have an expectation of privacy. The detective handling the case concluded that the established criteria for voyeurism could not be met, leading to the decision not to pursue criminal charges.

The civil matter has raised questions about the actions and responsibilities of the Fayette County Attorney’s office. Angela Evans, the county attorney, stated that her office fully cooperated with authorities during the investigation and took appropriate measures in response to the allegations. It is currently unclear whether the assistant prosecutor named in the lawsuit continues to work at Evans’ office, which consists of a total of 14 assistant county attorneys.

The legal implications surrounding this incident highlight the complexities of privacy rights in public and private settings, particularly regarding the actions of those in positions of authority. The civil lawsuit will continue to unfold as both parties prepare for further legal proceedings.

Deeper Dive: News & Info About This Topic

HERE Resources

Additional Resources

• Kentucky.com: Assistant Prosecutor Faces Civil Suit Over Voyeurism Allegations
• LEX18: Paris Man Arrested for Filming Juveniles
• WKYT: Man Charged in Lexington Voyeurism Case
• Encyclopedia Britannica: Voyeurism
• Google Search: Voyeurism Law in Kentucky

Author: HERE Lexington