Making and keeping private videos

[Scruff]

will not change the end outcome

Feel free to disagree, but I think it's irresponsible to make such a definitive statement based on such little information.

The OP hasn't yet provided the most basic of facts and until he does, we don't know if his actions even constitute an offence to begin with - which is clearly his main concern when he asks "Can i be charged under the current laws..." To determine that, we need to know the following at the very least:

For a general offence (eg: Crimes Act, Criminal Code, etc):
1. In which state/territory were the pictures taken? (As we all know - different laws in different states.)
2. When were the pictures taken? (The OP stated "She is long gone" - but how long? Without at least the year the pictures were taken, we can't determine if any law has even been broken.)

For an offence under surveillance laws:
3. Where were the pictures taken? (Who's house - the OP's or someone elses? From what I know, surveillance laws most likely wouldn't apply if the pictures were taken in his own home.)

I've asked questions and @Tim W has gone out of his way to provide some info based on different circumstances and scenarios. But until the OP provides more info, we're all poking around in the dark. We have to accept that people sometimes post questions here without enough information for us to help in any meaninful way, and so far, this is one of those occasions. The OP hasn't logged in since posting the question, so until he comes back and provides some more info, there's really not much more that can be said.

 

[Adam1user]

Feel free to disagree, but I think it's irresponsible to make such a definitive statement based on such little information.

The OP hasn't yet provided the most basic of facts and until he does, we don't know if his actions even constitute an offence to begin with - which is clearly his main concern when he asks "Can i be charged under the current laws..." To determine that, we need to know the following at the very least:

For a general offence (eg: Crimes Act, Criminal Code, etc):
1. In which state/territory were the pictures taken? (As we all know - different laws in different states.)
2. When were the pictures taken? (The OP stated "She is long gone" - but how long? Without at least the year the pictures were taken, we can't determine if any law has even been broken.)

For an offence under surveillance laws:
3. Where were the pictures taken? (Who's house - the OP's or someone elses? From what I know, surveillance laws most likely wouldn't apply if the pictures were taken in his own home.)

I've asked questions and @Tim W has gone out of his way to provide some info based on different circumstances and scenarios. But until the OP provides more info, we're all poking around in the dark. We have to accept that people sometimes post questions here without enough information for us to help in any meaninful way, and so far, this is one of those occasions. The OP hasn't logged in since posting the question, so until he comes back and provides some more info, there's really not much more that can be said.

FYI: There is a history between Tim and myself, I had a post some time ago and Tim started to insult me - as he does with everyone, but I did not let him be, as you can see from the other post, he put my username in his response, Trying to show me wrong. If you like see: NSW - Riding a Scooter in Car Park Without a Helmet? . He got pissed because he was wrong and did not accept that fact.

As for your comments, I agree, there are information not known, but for the core of the matter, the poster was not recording to protect his residence, like the camera directed towards the street showing the residence entrance for example, It is recording directed at a person changing in a private room, so that is clear cut it is not for protection and it is for person benefit (or fetish), there are stories in the media where people did record like that and were charged. So the poster was not acting in anyway to protect the property from theft or being damaged, but was recording against his girlfriend consent [key aspect for this], so in summary and answer to the poster's direct question, I doubt that the police will let it go, I am positive that they will proceed with the claim and charge, this is my opinion based on the poster's question.

As for the other comments relating how the employer got the video etc...., I doubt that will change the outcome for the poster but depending on how the employer got it, it may raise issues for the employer, and that was not in the poster's interest as not mentioned in the poster's question.