Gonzalez & Waddington, Attorneys at Law defend service members accused of indecent viewing and “peeping” allegations under Article 120c of the UCMJ. These cases often involve accusations of secretly watching or recording another person in a private setting, such as barracks rooms, bathrooms, showers, or off-duty housing. Even without physical contact, these allegations can lead to punitive discharges, confinement, and mandatory sex offender registration. This guide explains how these cases are prosecuted, what evidence is usually presented, and how to defend against them.

What Is Indecent Viewing Under Article 120c?

• Knowingly viewing the private area of another person without consent.
• Private area defined: Genitalia, anus, buttocks, or breasts of a female.
• Expectation of privacy: The alleged victim must have had a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time (e.g., locker room, latrine, barracks room).
• Without consent: The viewing must be intentional and non-consensual.

“Peeping” Allegations in the Military

Common scenarios that trigger charges:

• Looking into a barracks room window or through a door crack.
• Using a cell phone or camera to record in a shower, latrine, or locker room.
• Accessing video calls, live streams, or images without consent.
• Installing hidden cameras or borrowing devices to record secretly.

How the Government Prosecutes Indecent Viewing Cases

• Digital evidence: Photos, videos, or search history showing attempts to view or record others.
• Witnesses: Individuals claiming they saw the accused watching or using a device improperly.
• Metadata: Timestamps and geolocation data linking the accused’s device to the alleged incident.
• Statements: Admissions or comments made by the accused, often during interrogation.

Consequences of an Indecent Viewing Conviction

• Punitive discharge: Dishonorable discharge (enlisted) or dismissal (officers).
• Confinement: Can range from months to several years depending on aggravating factors.
• Sex offender registration: Most indecent viewing convictions require registration.
• Career impacts: Loss of security clearance, benefits, and post-military employment opportunities.

Defense Strategies Against Article 120c Viewing Charges

• Consent: Prove the alleged victim consented to being viewed, photographed, or recorded.
• Lack of intent: Show that any viewing was accidental, incidental, or misinterpreted.
• Privacy expectation: Argue that the alleged victim did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy under the circumstances.
• Device access: Demonstrate that someone else could have used the accused’s phone or computer.
• Digital forensics: Challenge whether the government can prove the accused actually created or accessed the images.

Mistakes That Hurt the Defense

• Admitting to “just looking” during questioning without legal counsel.
• Deleting photos or wiping devices, which looks like obstruction of justice.
• Underestimating how seriously 120c charges are prosecuted.
• Failing to hire independent forensic experts to examine digital evidence.

Defense Framework for Indecent Viewing Cases

1. Intent: Did the accused knowingly and deliberately view?
2. Privacy: Was there a reasonable expectation of privacy?
3. Consent: Was there explicit or implied agreement to be viewed or recorded?
4. Forensics: Can the government prove device ownership and access?
5. Reasonable doubt: Highlight gaps in eyewitness testimony and digital evidence.

Video: Fighting Indecent Viewing Charges in Military Courts

We Defend Service Members Accused of Indecent Viewing

“Peeping” and indecent viewing cases often hinge on digital forensics, eyewitness reliability, and consent. Our firm uses independent experts and cross-examination to dismantle weak government cases and protect service members from career-ending convictions.

Gonzalez & Waddington — ucmjdefense.com — 1-800-921-8607

FAQs: Indecent Viewing in the Military